The Bombay High Court, the tenants challenged a decree of eviction that was passed on the grounds of rent arrears, damaging the property, and unauthorized construction. The plaintiffs, who became landlords after purchasing the property, sought eviction for unpaid rent and permanent changes made to the rented shop. The Small Causes Court and the District Court in Pune had both ruled in favor of the landlords. The tenants' revision petition was dismissed by the Bombay High Court, which upheld the eviction order.

1. Parties Involved:

• Applicants (Tenants): Anil Joginder Sachdev and Rajeev Joginder Sachdev, operating a business at the rented premises.
• Respondents (Landlords): Balasaheb Hiralal Zad and Chandrakala Balasaheb Zad, who purchased the property in 1979.

2. Property in Question:

• A 150-square-foot shop located on Laxmi Road, Pune.

3. Initial Dispute:

• Rent arrears since 1991, permanent structural changes to the shop, and alleged damage to the premises.
• Rent was fixed at Rs. 88.30 per month in 1992 by the Small Causes Court.

4. Legal Proceedings:

• Original Suit: Filed by landlords in 1999 after notice for rent arrears was issued. The suit was based on arrears of rent, unauthorized construction, and alleged damage to the property.
• Trial Court: Decreed in favor of the landlords in 2011, ordering eviction.
• Appellate Court: Confirmed the Trial Court's decision in 2018.
• High Court: The tenants invoked Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but the High Court upheld the previous rulings on September 13, 2024.

5. Grounds of Eviction:

• Rent Arrears: Tenants defaulted on rent from January 1991, despite partial deposits.
• Unauthorized Construction: Permanent structures were built without the landlord's consent, violating tenancy terms.
• Damage to Property: Alterations to the shop’s structure caused damage to the premises.

6. Legal Framework:

• Section 12(3) of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947: Addressed default in rent payment.
• Section 13(1)(a) & (b) of the Bombay Rent Act: Concerned with breach of tenancy terms and unauthorized construction.
• Section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act: Related to damage to the property.

7. Court's Findings:

• Default in Rent: Tenants failed to deposit the entire arrears within the statutory period.
• Unauthorized Construction: Tenants constructed permanent structures inside and outside the shop without permission.
• Damage: The alterations caused injury to the property.

Legal Ratio:

The Court confirmed that tenants must adhere strictly to the terms of the tenancy agreement. A breach in payment of rent, unauthorized alterations to the property, or causing damage to the premises provides valid grounds for eviction under the Bombay Rent Act and Transfer of Property Act.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Section 12(3), Bombay Rent Act, 1947: Deals with tenant eviction in case of rent default.
• Section 13(1)(a), (b), Bombay Rent Act, 1947: Specifies grounds for eviction based on injury to property and unauthorized construction.
• Section 108(o), Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Prohibits tenants from causing damage to the leased property.

Subjects:

#EvictionCase #RentDefault #UnauthorizedConstruction #PropertyLaw #BombayRentAct #CivilProcedure #TenancyDispute #HighCourt