Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Vinayak Ranum D. P. Loundo, challenged the judgment and order dated 21.03.2011 passed in Eviction Appeal No. 10/2007 and the order dated 16.11.2011 passed in Review Application No. 8/11 by the Rent Controller at Panaji. The respondents, Ms. Amira A. Razaq and others, had filed an application for eviction under Section 22(2)(a),(b),(c),(f) and 23(b) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968. The suit premises consisted of a garage situated on the ground floor of a building known as 'Yasin Manzil' facing Dr. Dada Vaidya Road at Panaji, which was leased to the petitioner's predecessor. The respondents contended that the petitioner had sublet the premises without consent and had ceased to use the premises for the purpose for which it was let out. The petitioner filed a written statement disputing the claim. The Rent Controller allowed the eviction application, and the appeal and review were dismissed. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the findings of fact by the lower authorities were based on evidence and did not warrant interference. The court noted that the petitioner had allowed a third party to use the garage for business, constituting subletting, and that the garage was not used by the petitioner for parking or any other purpose, establishing non-user. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the eviction order.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Eviction - Subletting - Section 22(2)(a) Goa, Daman and Diu Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - Landlord sought eviction on ground that tenant sublet the premises without consent - Court found that tenant had parted with possession and allowed third party to use the garage for business - Held that subletting was established and eviction justified (Paras 2-5). B) Rent Control - Eviction - Non-User - Section 22(2)(b) Goa, Daman and Diu Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - Landlord alleged that tenant ceased to use the premises for the purpose for which it was let out - Evidence showed that the garage was not used by tenant for parking or any other purpose - Held that non-user was proved and eviction warranted (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the eviction of the petitioner on grounds of subletting and non-user of the suit premises under the Goa, Daman and Diu Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 was justified.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the eviction order passed by the Rent Controller and confirmed in appeal and review.
Law Points
- Eviction on ground of subletting
- Eviction on ground of non-user
- Burden of proof on landlord
- Goa Rent Control Act
