Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajendrakumar Sharandas Sharma, a retired Sub Divisional Officer, filed a suit for eviction against the respondent tenant, Shrikrushna Babanrao Guhe (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), in the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Akot. The suit premises comprised a plot admeasuring 1750 sq. ft. with a tin shed of 16 x 12 feet, where the tenant was residing. The petitioner claimed bonafide need for his own residence as he was living in tenanted premises and wanted to construct a house on the plot. The Trial Court decreed eviction on 06.07.2002 in Regular Civil Suit No. 140/2002. The tenant appealed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 35 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, and the Additional District Judge, Akola, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 162/2002, set aside the eviction decree on 05.10.2002, holding that the landlord could construct on the remaining portion of the plot without demolishing the tin shed. The petitioner challenged this appellate judgment in the High Court. The High Court found that the Appellate Court had erroneously mixed the issue of bonafide need with the need for immediate demolition, whereas the bonafide need was not denied. The Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the appellate judgment, and restored the Trial Court's eviction decree.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Bonafide Need - Section 16(1)(g) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Landlord sought eviction of tenant for his own residence - Trial Court decreed eviction on ground of bonafide need - Appellate Court set aside decree by mixing bonafide need with demolition requirement - Held that Appellate Court erred in mixing issues and that bonafide need was not denied (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Appellate Court erred in mixing the issue of bonafide need with the need for immediate purpose of demolition and setting aside the eviction decree.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Judgment and decree dated 05.10.2002 passed by Additional District Judge, Akola in Regular Civil Appeal No. 162/2002 is set aside. Judgment and decree dated 06.07.2002 passed by Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Akot in Regular Civil Suit No. 140/2002 is restored. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Bonafide need of landlord
- Section 16(1)(g) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act
- 1999
- Eviction decree
- Appellate court's error in mixing bonafide need with demolition
