Case Note & Summary
The original plaintiff, Smt. Sudha Sumant Barve (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), owned the ground and first floor of Shrikrupa Building in Thane. The defendant, Smt. Ranjana Ramesh Padhye, was the tenant of two rooms and kitchen with bathroom on the ground floor, originally rented to her husband for residential purposes at Rs. 160 per month since March 1974. After her husband's death on 17 December 1993, the defendant resided there with her two children. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant, after taking voluntary retirement, started a creche in the suit premises with 18-20 children, causing nuisance. Rent was unpaid since 1 January 1994. The defendant sent a notice on 15 March 1994 requesting rent receipt in her name, but the plaintiff terminated tenancy on 22 June 1994. The plaintiff also claimed that the defendant erected permanent structures without permission, including enclosing open galleries with iron grills and breaking original doors. The plaintiff, a schizophrenia patient, resided with her divorced daughter, son, daughter-in-law, and two school-going children in only 300 sq. ft with common toilet, and sought eviction for bonafide requirement. The defendant resisted, raising non-joinder of the plaintiff's son and daughter as necessary parties. The trial court decreed eviction on grounds of change of user, nuisance, and bonafide requirement. The appellate court reversed, holding that the creche was not a nuisance and that the landlord's requirement was not bonafide. The High Court allowed the writ petition, restoring the trial court's decree, holding that running a creche in a residential premises constitutes change of user and nuisance, and that the landlord's bonafide requirement was established.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Change of User - Nuisance - Sections 13(1)(a), 13(1)(c) Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Tenant using residential premises for running a creche with 18-20 children causing nuisance to landlord and other residents - Held that such use constitutes change of user and nuisance, justifying eviction (Paras 2-4, 10-12).
B) Rent Control - Bonafide Requirement - Section 13(1)(g) Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Landlord residing with 6 family members in 300 sq. ft area, suffering from schizophrenia, requiring additional space - Held that landlord's bonafide requirement is established (Paras 5, 13-15).
C) Civil Procedure - Non-joinder of Necessary Parties - Order 1 Rule 10 CPC - Tenant's objection that landlord's son and daughter were not joined as parties - Held that landlord alone is sufficient owner and necessary party, no non-joinder (Paras 6, 16-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether running a creche in residential premises amounts to change of user and nuisance, and whether the landlord's bonafide requirement is established.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Order of appellate court dated 21 June 2002 set aside. Decree of eviction passed by trial court restored. Civil Application disposed of.
Law Points
- Change of user
- nuisance
- bonafide requirement
- non-joinder of necessary parties
- eviction under rent control act
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (05) 22
Writ Petition No. 5202 of 2002 with Civil Application No. 673 of 2013
Mr. S.C. Joshi for the petitioner, Mr. G.R. Agrawal for the respondent
Smt. Sudha Sumant Barve (since deceased through her legal heirs Shri Yashwant S. Barve and Smt. Rekha S. Barve)
Smt. Ranjana Ramesh Padhye
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging appellate order in eviction suit under rent control legislation.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner (original plaintiff/landlord) sought eviction of respondent-tenant on grounds of change of user, nuisance, and bonafide requirement.
Filing Reason
Tenant used residential premises for running a creche, causing nuisance, and landlord needed premises for her family.
Previous Decisions
Trial court (Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Thane) decreed eviction on 29 July 1999 in Regular Civil Suit No. 293/1995. Appellate court (Joint District Judge, Thane) allowed appeal on 21 June 2002, setting aside eviction decree.
Issues
Whether running a creche in residential premises amounts to change of user and nuisance under Section 13(1)(a) and (c) of the Bombay Rent Act?
Whether the landlord's bonafide requirement under Section 13(1)(g) is established?
Whether non-joinder of landlord's son and daughter as necessary parties is fatal?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner: Tenant changed user from residential to commercial by running a creche, causing nuisance; landlord requires premises for her family of 6 living in 300 sq. ft.
Respondent: Creche is not a nuisance; landlord's requirement not bonafide; son and daughter are necessary parties.
Ratio Decidendi
Running a creche in residential premises constitutes change of user and nuisance, justifying eviction under Section 13(1)(a) and (c) of the Bombay Rent Act. Landlord's bonafide requirement for additional space for her family is established. Non-joinder of landlord's son and daughter is not fatal as landlord is the owner.
Judgment Excerpts
The petition challenges the order passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Thane dated 21st June, 2002 thereby allowing civil appeal no. 145/1999 filed by the respondent-tenant and setting aside the decree of eviction as passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Thane in Regular Civil Suit No. 293/1995 dated 29th July, 1999.
It is the contention of the plaintiff that the suit premises were given on rent to the husband of the defendant only for residential purposes.
According to the plaintiff there were 18-20 children in the said creche.
The plaintiffs, therefore, pleaded for the requirement of the suit premises on the ground of bonafide requirement also.
Procedural History
Original plaintiff filed Regular Civil Suit No. 293/1995 for eviction. Trial court decreed eviction on 29 July 1999. Tenant appealed (Civil Appeal No. 145/1999) which was allowed on 21 June 2002, setting aside eviction. Landlord filed Writ Petition No. 5202 of 2002 in High Court. During pendency, original plaintiff died and legal heirs substituted. High Court allowed writ petition on 10 May 2013, restoring trial court's decree.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947: 13(1)(a), 13(1)(c), 13(1)(g)
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 1 Rule 10
