Case Note & Summary
The case involves a landlord (original plaintiff) who filed a suit for eviction against the tenant, M/s. Hitex Embroidery Pvt. Ltd., under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, on the ground that the tenant had sublet the suit premises without the landlord's written consent. The landlord alleged that the tenant had given exclusive possession of the premises to a third party, who was carrying on business there, and that the tenant was receiving rent from that party. The trial court decreed the suit, and the appeal by the tenant was dismissed. The tenant then filed a writ petition in the High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, including the tenant's own admission that a third party was in possession and that the tenant had received rent from that party. The court held that the landlord had discharged the initial burden of proving subletting, and the tenant failed to rebut the presumption. The court found that the tenant had parted with possession and received rent, which amounted to subletting without consent. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the eviction decree.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Eviction - Subletting - Section 13(1)(e) of Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Landlord sought eviction of tenant on ground of subletting without consent - Court held that exclusive possession of third party and receipt of rent by tenant from such party established subletting - Landlord proved that tenant had parted with possession and received rent from subtenant - Eviction decree confirmed (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent-tenant sublet the suit premises to a third party without the landlord's consent, thereby incurring eviction under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947.
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed; eviction decree confirmed.
Law Points
- Subletting without landlord's consent constitutes ground for eviction
- Exclusive possession and receipt of rent by tenant from subtenant establishes subletting
- Burden of proof on landlord to show subletting
- Onus shifts to tenant to explain possession of third party
