Case Note & Summary
The present petition was filed by a sub-tenant, Baburao Laxman Kshatriya (deceased, represented by his legal heir Smt. Kesharbai Baburao Kshatriya), challenging the concurrent findings of the courts below which decreed the landlord's suit for possession. The dispute pertained to premises owned by the Balaji Mandir Trust (respondent). The sub-tenant claimed protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947, which requires the sub-tenant to have been in occupation prior to 1st February 1973. Both the trial court and the first appellate court, after considering the evidence, concluded that the sub-tenant was not in occupation before that date. The petitioner's counsel argued that the case fell under Section 5(11) and Section 15(1)(a) rather than Section 15A, but the High Court found no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Sub-tenancy - Protection under Section 15A - The sub-tenant must prove occupation prior to 1st February 1973 to claim protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947. Both courts below concurrently found that the petitioner was not in occupation prior to that date, and the High Court declined to interfere in writ jurisdiction. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner-sub-tenant was in occupation of the suit premises prior to 1st February 1973 and thus entitled to protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Sub-tenant must prove occupation prior to 1st February 1973 to claim protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act
- Concurrent findings of fact not interfered with in writ jurisdiction
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (07) 170
Writ Petition No. 5442 of 1991
Mr. R.M. Pethe i/b Mr. B.R. Phatak for the petitioner, Mr. S.J. Rairkar for Respondents No. 1,2,3,7,8,9, and 10
Shri Baburao Laxman Kshatriya (deceased) by his L.R. Smt. Kesharbai Baburao Kshatriya
Shri Balaji Mandir Trust and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging concurrent findings of courts below in a landlord's suit for possession against a sub-tenant.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (sub-tenant) sought to challenge the concurrent findings of the courts below which decreed the landlord's suit for possession.
Filing Reason
The petitioner claimed protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, but the courts below found he was not in occupation prior to 1st February 1973.
Previous Decisions
Both the trial court and the first appellate court decreed the landlord's suit for possession, holding that the sub-tenant was not in occupation prior to 1st February 1973.
Issues
Whether the petitioner-sub-tenant was in occupation of the suit premises prior to 1st February 1973 and thus entitled to protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel argued that the case falls under Section 5(11) and Section 15(1)(a) and not under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act.
Respondents' counsel supported the concurrent findings of the courts below.
Ratio Decidendi
A sub-tenant claiming protection under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act must prove occupation prior to 1st February 1973. Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts on this issue are not interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
The present petition is by the sub-tenant who sought to challenge the concurrent findings given by the Courts below, whereby the landlord's suit for possession has been decreed.
Both the courts, after considering the material on the record, including the evidence led by the parties, arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner-sub tenant was not in occupation, prior to 1st February 1973, and therefore, there was no question of granting protection and specially of Section 15 (A) of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947.
Procedural History
The landlord filed a suit for possession against the sub-tenant. The trial court decreed the suit. The first appellate court confirmed the decree. The sub-tenant filed the present writ petition in the High Court challenging the concurrent findings.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947: Section 5(11), Section 15(1)(a), Section 15A
