Case Note & Summary
The petitioner-landlord filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging concurrent findings of fact by two lower courts that dismissed his suit for eviction against the respondent-tenant under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947. The landlord sought possession on grounds that the tenant had erected permanent structures, acquired suitable residential accommodation, and that the landlord required the premises bonafide for his own use and occupation. The trial court and the first appellate court both held that the landlord failed to prove these grounds. The High Court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel and reviewing the evidence, including the testimony of Dashrath Pandhare (PW1) and his son Pradip Pandhare (PW2), found that the reasoning of the lower courts was within the framework of law and supported by the record. The court noted that the petitioner was unable to demonstrate any perversity or error warranting interference under Article 227. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, upholding the concurrent findings of fact.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Eviction - Bonafide Need - Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 - Landlord sought eviction on grounds of bonafide need, permanent structure, and acquisition of suitable accommodation - Both courts below held that landlord failed to prove these grounds - High Court under Article 227 declined to interfere as findings were based on evidence and within legal framework (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court under Article 227 should interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in an eviction suit under the Bombay Rent Act.
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts upheld. No interference under Article 227.
Law Points
- Article 227 of the Constitution of India
- Bombay Rents
- Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act
- 1947
- concurrent findings of fact
- bonafide need
- permanent structure
- suitable accommodation
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (05) 216
Writ Petition No. 5913 of 1991
V.B. Rajure, A.S. Chandurkar
Chandrakant Jadhavji Chandan Alias Thakkar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition under Article 227 challenging concurrent findings in an eviction suit under the Bombay Rent Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner-landlord sought eviction of respondent-tenant from suit premises.
Filing Reason
Landlord alleged tenant erected permanent structures, acquired suitable residential accommodation, and landlord needed premises bonafide for own use.
Previous Decisions
Both trial court and first appellate court dismissed the eviction suit, holding landlord failed to prove grounds.
Issues
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in an eviction suit.
Whether the landlord proved bonafide need, permanent structure, and acquisition of suitable accommodation.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that lower courts erred in dismissing the suit despite evidence of bonafide need and tenant's misconduct.
Respondent did not appear; no submissions recorded.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Article 227, the High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they are perverse or based on no evidence. Here, the lower courts' findings were within the legal framework and supported by evidence.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner-landlord has invoked the provision of Article 227 of the Constitution of India and thereby challenged the concurrent finding of facts, whereby, both the Courts below, after considering the material, on the record, dismissed the suit for eviction.
After going through the evidence, as well as, the reasoning, in so far as, bonafide need of the petitioner-landlord is concerned, and basically the evidence of Dashrath Pandhare (PW.1) and Pradip Pandhare (PW2) (son of the petitioner), I am of the view that the reasoning given by the Courts below is within the frame work of law, and the record.
Procedural History
Landlord filed eviction suit in trial court; suit dismissed. Landlord appealed to first appellate court; appeal dismissed. Landlord then filed writ petition under Article 227 in Bombay High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947:
- Constitution of India: Article 227
