Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute between the petitioners (original defendants) and the respondent (original plaintiff) concerning a suit filed by the respondent in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay, being Reg. Civil Suit No.236/1983. The respondent-plaintiff sought possession of residential premises on the ground of bonafide need for non-residential use under Section 13(1)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 (Bombay Rent Act). The petitioners-defendants filed an application seeking framing of a preliminary issue as to whether the suit was maintainable under the Bombay Rent Act, and insisted on dismissal of the suit on that ground. The trial court, by order dated 19/9/1992, rejected the application. The petitioners challenged this order by way of a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The High Court heard the respondent's counsel, as none appeared for the petitioners. The court observed that there was nothing preventing the parties from filing a suit for bonafide need under Section 13(1)(a) for use of residential premises for non-residential purpose. The court further noted that the issue of maintainability could not be decided as a preliminary issue without evidence, and at best, the suit could be dismissed on merits on that ground. The court held that the trial court's order rejecting the application was correct and dismissed the writ petition. The judgment emphasizes that preliminary issues on maintainability should not be framed when they require factual determination, and that suits under Section 13(1)(a) for bonafide need are maintainable.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Preliminary Issue - Maintainability of Suit - Order XIV Rule 2 CPC - The court held that the issue of maintainability of a suit under the Bombay Rent Act cannot be decided as a preliminary issue without leading evidence, as it involves factual determination. The trial court rightly rejected the application for framing such preliminary issue. (Paras 1-2) B) Rent Control - Bonafide Need - Section 13(1)(a) Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 - The court held that a suit for bonafide need to use residential premises for non-residential purpose is maintainable under Section 13(1)(a). The question of maintainability cannot be decided at the threshold without evidence. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff under Section 13(1)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 for bonafide need to use residential premises for non-residential purpose is maintainable and whether the issue of maintainability can be framed as a preliminary issue.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order rejecting the application for framing a preliminary issue on maintainability. The court held that the suit under Section 13(1)(a) for bonafide need for non-residential use of residential premises is maintainable and cannot be dismissed at the preliminary stage without evidence.
Law Points
- Maintainability of suit cannot be decided as preliminary issue without evidence
- Suit under Section 13(1)(a) Bombay Rent Act for bonafide need for non-residential use of residential premises is maintainable
- Preliminary issue on maintainability should not be framed when it requires factual determination
