Bombay High Court Allows Tenant's Writ Petition in Rent Control Eviction Case — Suit Filed Before Expiry of 90-Day Notice Period Under Section 15(2) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Held Without Jurisdiction. The defect of premature filing is not curable and can be raised for the first time in writ petition.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 36
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, a tenant in premises owned by the respondent, was served with a demand notice under Section 15(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 on 19/02/2008. The respondent filed a suit for eviction on 01/03/2008, before the expiry of the 90-day period stipulated under the Act. The trial court decreed the suit on grounds of arrears of rent and bonafide need. The appellate court reversed the finding on bonafide need but confirmed the arrears finding. The tenant filed a writ petition challenging the decree. The High Court considered the issue of whether the suit was premature. The petitioner argued that the suit was filed before the 90-day period expired, rendering the decree without jurisdiction, and that this defect was not curable. The respondent contended that the plea was not raised earlier. The High Court held that the requirement of 90 days is mandatory and jurisdictional; a suit filed before its expiry is not maintainable. The defect is not curable and can be raised at any stage. The court allowed the petition, set aside the eviction decree, and dismissed the suit as premature, leaving the respondent free to file a fresh suit after the notice period.

Headnote

A) Rent Control - Eviction Suit - Premature Filing - Section 15(2) Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 - Suit for eviction on ground of arrears of rent filed before expiry of 90 days from service of demand notice is premature and without jurisdiction - The defect is not curable and goes to the root of the matter - Even if not raised earlier, such a legal plea can be raised at any stage including in writ petition (Paras 6-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a suit for eviction filed before the expiry of ninety days from service of demand notice under Section 15(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 is maintainable and whether the defect is curable.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition allowed. Impugned judgment and decree set aside. Suit for eviction dismissed as premature. Respondent at liberty to file fresh suit after expiry of notice period.

Law Points

  • Suit for eviction on ground of arrears of rent cannot be filed before expiry of 90 days from service of demand notice under Section 15(2) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act
  • 1999
  • Defect of jurisdiction is not curable
  • Legal plea regarding lack of jurisdiction can be raised for first time in writ petition
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (07) 129

Writ Petition No.3788 of 2015

2016-07-07

A.S. Chandurkar

Shri Rohit Joshi for petitioner, Shri S. K. Bhoyar for respondent

Jitendra s/o Vasantrao Nagarkar

Mohanlal s/o Maluramji Agrawal

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging eviction decree under rent control laws

Remedy Sought

Petitioner (tenant) sought to set aside the eviction decree on ground that suit was filed before expiry of 90-day notice period

Filing Reason

Suit for eviction filed before expiry of 90 days from service of demand notice under Section 15(2) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999

Previous Decisions

Trial court decreed eviction; appellate court confirmed arrears finding but reversed bonafide need; tenant filed writ petition

Issues

Whether the suit for eviction filed before expiry of 90 days from service of demand notice under Section 15(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 is maintainable? Whether the defect of premature filing is curable and can be raised for the first time in writ petition?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner: Suit filed before 90-day period expired, court lacked jurisdiction, defect not curable, legal plea can be raised at any stage. Respondent: Plea not raised earlier, suit maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi

The requirement of 90 days under Section 15(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 is mandatory and jurisdictional. A suit filed before its expiry is not maintainable and the defect is not curable. Such a legal plea can be raised at any stage, including in writ petition.

Judgment Excerpts

The requirement of filing a suit after expiry of ninety days from service of notice under Section 15(2) of the said Act is mandatory and goes to the root of the matter. The defect of presenting the suit prior to expiry of ninety days is not curable and it is a case of jurisdiction being exercised in a manner contrary to law.

Procedural History

Notice under Section 15(2) served on 19/02/2008. Suit filed on 01/03/2008. Trial court decreed eviction on 27/01/2015. Appellate court dismissed appeal on same date. Tenant filed writ petition in High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999: Section 15(2)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Tenant's Writ Petition in Rent Control Eviction Case — Suit Filed Before Expiry of 90-Day Notice Period Under Section 15(2) of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 Held Without Jurisdiction. The defect of premature filing is ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence and Unreliable Witnesses. Conviction under Section 302 IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.