Bombay High Court Dismisses Tenant's Petition, Upholds Eviction Decree Under Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Tenant's Admission of Higher Rent and Failure to Deposit Arrears Justified Eviction.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 56
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, a tenant, challenged the eviction decree passed under Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, as upheld by the first appellate court. The premises was a ground floor shop let out on monthly rent. The tenant claimed the rent was Rs. 500 per month, while the landlord claimed it was Rs. 5000 per month. The landlord issued a notice on 29.04.2008 demanding arrears from 01.07.2000 to 30.04.2008 at Rs. 5000 per month. The tenant replied that the rent was Rs. 500 per month and sent a cheque of Rs. 18,000 for arrears of three years at that rate. The landlord filed Civil Suit No. 250 of 2008 for eviction on grounds of arrears and bonafide need. During trial, the tenant admitted in cross-examination that the rent was Rs. 5000 per month. Consequently, the landlord filed an application under Order 15A Rule 1 CPC on 19.04.2010. The trial court directed the tenant to deposit arrears at Rs. 5000 per month, but the tenant failed to do so. The trial court passed a decree for eviction under Section 15(3) of the Act, which was confirmed by the appellate court. The High Court held that once the tenant admitted the rent, he was bound to deposit arrears at that rate. His failure to do so disentitled him from protection under Section 15(3). The petition was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Rent Control - Eviction for Non-Payment of Rent - Section 15(3) Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Order 15A Rule 1 CPC - Tenant admitted rent at Rs. 5000 per month but deposited only Rs. 18,000 at Rs. 500 per month - Trial court passed decree for eviction under Section 15(3) for non-payment of arrears - Appellate court upheld decree - Held that once tenant admitted higher rent, failure to deposit arrears at that rate justified eviction (Paras 2-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the tenant is entitled to protection from eviction under Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, when he admitted the rent to be Rs. 5000 per month but failed to deposit the arrears as directed by the court.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ Petition dismissed. Eviction decree under Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 upheld. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Eviction for non-payment of rent
  • Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act
  • 1999
  • Order 15A Rule 1 CPC
  • Admission of rent
  • Deposit of arrears
  • Limitation for arrears
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (BOM) (02) 157

Writ Petition No. 1639 of 2014

2015-02-12

A. S. Chandurkar J.

Shri A. A. Naik for Petitioner, Shri R. M. Sharma for Respondent

Prabhakar Venkobaji Manekar

Surendra Dinanath Sharma

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging eviction decree under Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner (tenant) sought to set aside the eviction decree passed by trial court and upheld by appellate court.

Filing Reason

Tenant was in arrears of rent; landlord sought eviction on ground of non-payment and bonafide need.

Previous Decisions

Trial court passed eviction decree under Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999; first appellate court confirmed the decree.

Issues

Whether the tenant's admission of rent at Rs. 5000 per month and failure to deposit arrears at that rate justified eviction under Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that rent was Rs. 500 per month and he had paid arrears for three years. Respondent argued that rent was Rs. 5000 per month and tenant failed to deposit arrears despite admission.

Ratio Decidendi

Once a tenant admits the rate of rent, he is bound to deposit arrears at that rate. Failure to do so disentitles him from protection under Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, and eviction is justified.

Judgment Excerpts

In the trial, the tenant in his cross examination admitted the rent to be Rs. 5000/ per month. The trial Court passed a decree for eviction under Section 15(3) of the said Act. Once the tenant admitted the rent to be Rs. 5000/ per month, he was bound to deposit the arrears at that rate.

Procedural History

Landlord filed Civil Suit No. 250 of 2008 on 08.08.2008 for eviction. Trial court passed eviction decree under Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Tenant appealed; first appellate court confirmed decree. Tenant filed Writ Petition No. 1639 of 2014 in High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999: 15(3)
  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 15A Rule 1
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Tenant's Petition, Upholds Eviction Decree Under Section 15(3) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Tenant's Admission of Higher Rent and Failure to Deposit Arrears Justified Eviction.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Upholds Conviction in NDPS Act Case for Possession of 2.225 kg Charas. Mandatory compliance with Section 50 of NDPS Act not triggered as recovery was from bag, not person.