Case Note & Summary
This writ petition before the High Court of Bombay at Goa arose from eviction proceedings under the Goa, Daman and Diu (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968. The petitioners, M/s Kamta Corporation through its partners Babuli Kamat Ghanekar and Dilip Kamat Ghanekar, were the tenants of shop premises No.4 on the ground floor of 'Jaan Apartment' at Ponda, Goa. The respondent, Joaquim Cupertino Costa, acting through power of attorney holder Belarmino Fernandes, was the landlord. A lease deed was executed on 10 April 1986 between the landlord and his wife on one side and the tenant on the other, concerning a shop measuring 25 square metres with a monthly rent of Rs.700 payable by crossed cheque on or before the 10th of each month. The deed contained covenants requiring the tenant to pay electricity and water charges and keep the premises in good condition, while the landlord undertook to pay annual municipal charges. The landlord issued a notice dated 18 January 2016 alleging irregular payment of rent, arrears of Rs.17,250 for the period from 21 January 2014 to 31 December 2015, closure of the shop since 2012, and bona fide need to start his own business after retirement. The notice sent by R.P.A.D. was returned with the endorsement 'party left'. The landlord then filed an eviction application under Sections 22(2)(a) and 22(2)(f) and Section 23(1)(b) of the Rent Act before the Civil Judge Junior Division, Ponda, registered as Case No.6/2016/C. The grounds included irregular payment, failure to pay electricity charges of approximately Rs.13,700 since March 2012, failure to pay municipal charges of Rs.4,798, cessation of occupation for a continuous period of four months without sufficient cause, and bona fide requirement for the landlord's own business. The tenant opposed the application, stating that the rent had been paid after initiation of proceedings, denying irregularity, and alleging that the landlord and his wife resided in Dubai and monthly cheques were deposited in their account. The available text excerpt was truncated during the tenant's submission regarding a cheque. The trial court passed an eviction order, and the tenant's appeal, Rent Appeal No.1 of 2019, was dismissed by the District Judge-2, Panaji. The tenant then filed the present writ petition challenging that appellate order. The High Court reserved judgment on 14 January 2021 and pronounced it on 22 January 2021. The available excerpt does not include the court's analysis or final operative direction.
Headnote
A) Landlord and Tenant - Eviction Proceedings - Grounds for Eviction - Goa, Daman and Diu (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968, Sections 22(2)(a), 22(2)(f), 23(1)(b) - The landlord filed an eviction application alleging irregular payment of rent, arrears from January 2014 to December 2015, non-payment of electricity and municipal charges, closure of shop since 2012, cessation of occupation for four months, and bona fide need to start own business after retirement; the tenant denied irregularity, claimed rent was paid after initiation of proceedings, and stated that the landlord resided in Dubai with monthly cheques deposited in his account; the trial court ordered eviction and the District Judge dismissed the tenant's appeal; the writ petition challenged the appellate order - Held not stated in the available excerpt (Paras 2-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment in Rent Appeal No.1 of 2019 dismissing the tenant's appeal against eviction was sustainable
Final Decision
Not mentioned in available excerpt; judgment reserved and pronounced on 22 January 2021, but operative part not provided.
Law Points
- Eviction grounds under Goa
- Daman and Diu (Lease
- Rent and Eviction) Control Act
- 1968 including arrears of rent
- non-payment of electricity and municipal charges
- cessation of occupation
- and bona fide requirement
