Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Civil Revision Application filed by the original defendants (tenants) challenging the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court in Appeal No.114/2010 dated 28.09.2012. The respondents (landlords) had filed RAE Suit No.139/2005 seeking eviction of the applicants from the suit premises on multiple grounds: change of user from residential to commercial, non-user for more than six months, acquisition of alternate residential accommodation, illegal subletting to defendant No.2, nuisance and annoyance, and bonafide and reasonable requirement of the landlord. The Trial Court decreed the suit on all grounds, including that the acts of the tenants fell within Section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, though no damage was caused. The lower Appellate Court, in appeal, set aside the decree on most grounds but confirmed it solely on the ground of change of user, holding that the tenants had changed the user of the suit premises from residential to commercial by storing cloth packages and conducting business. Aggrieved, the tenants filed the present revision. The High Court examined the allegations in the plaint, which stated that defendant No.2 was using the premises for storing cloth packages and conducting business. The court noted that the Appellate Court had found the change of user proved and that this finding was based on evidence. The High Court upheld the Appellate Court's decision, dismissing the revision application and confirming the eviction decree on the ground of change of user. The court did not interfere with the concurrent findings of fact, as the revision jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC is limited to jurisdictional errors. The decision was pronounced on 18th March 2013.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Change of User - Eviction - The landlord sought eviction on grounds including change of user from residential to commercial, non-user for six months, acquisition of alternate accommodation, illegal subletting, nuisance, and bonafide requirement. The Trial Court decreed eviction on all grounds. The Appellate Court set aside most grounds but confirmed eviction on change of user. The High Court upheld the Appellate Court's finding that the tenant had changed the user of the suit premises from residential to commercial by storing cloth packages and conducting business, which was a violation of the terms of tenancy and the Rent Control Legislation. (Paras 2-5) B) Transfer of Property Act - Section 108(o) - Damage to Premises - The Trial Court held that the acts of the tenant did not result in damage to the suit premises nor reduced its life, but still fell within the purview of Section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The High Court did not disturb this finding as the eviction was confirmed on the independent ground of change of user. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the lower Appellate Court was justified in confirming the eviction decree solely on the ground of change of user of the suit premises from residential to commercial.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Application, upholding the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court confirming eviction on the ground of change of user. Rule discharged with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Change of user
- Residential to commercial
- Eviction decree
- Rent control legislation
- Section 108(o) Transfer of Property Act
- 1882
