Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, legal representatives of the deceased tenant Gurudas Narayan Salgaonkar, challenged an order dated 03/01/2014 passed by the Appellate Board in Rent Appeal No. 22 of 2013 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The respondent, Avduta Savlaram Aras, claimed to be the owner of a room on the ground floor of a building at Dada Vaidya Road, Panaji-Goa, which was leased to Gurudas for use as a motor workshop/garage on monthly rent. The respondent filed an eviction case before the Rent Controller under Sections 22(a) and 22(b)(i) and (ii) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968, alleging irregular payment of rent and subletting without consent. The Rent Controller dismissed the application on 30/07/2003. The respondent appealed to the Appellate Board, which allowed the appeal and ordered eviction. The petitioners then filed the present writ petition. The High Court examined the findings of the Appellate Board and noted that the tenant had admitted irregular payment of rent, and there was evidence of subletting. The Court held that the Appellate Board had correctly appreciated the evidence and that its findings were not perverse. The Court further held that under Article 227, it could not re-appreciate evidence or substitute its own findings. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the eviction order was upheld.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Eviction - Non-payment of Rent - Section 22(a) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - The tenant was irregular in payment of rent, and the landlord filed for eviction. The Appellate Board found that the tenant had not paid rent regularly, justifying eviction under Section 22(a). The High Court upheld this finding, noting that the tenant's own admission of irregular payment supported the eviction order. (Paras 1-5) B) Rent Control - Eviction - Subletting - Section 22(b)(i) and (ii) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 - The landlord alleged that the tenant had sublet the premises without consent. The Appellate Board found evidence of subletting, as the tenant had allowed another person to use the premises for a motor workshop. The High Court affirmed this finding, holding that subletting without the landlord's consent is a ground for eviction. (Paras 1-5) C) Constitutional Law - Superintendence - Article 227 of the Constitution of India - The petitioners challenged the Appellate Board's order under Article 227. The High Court held that the scope of Article 227 is limited to correcting errors of jurisdiction or perversity, and does not allow re-appreciation of evidence. Since the Appellate Board's findings were based on evidence and not perverse, the writ petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Appellate Board was justified in reversing the Rent Controller's order and ordering eviction of the tenant on grounds of non-payment of rent and subletting under Sections 22(a) and 22(b)(i) and (ii) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Appellate Board dated 03/01/2014, which ordered eviction of the tenant from the suit premises.
Law Points
- Eviction for non-payment of rent
- Eviction for subletting without consent
- Appellate Board's jurisdiction under Section 29 of the Act
- Scope of Article 227 of the Constitution of India
- Concurrent findings of fact not to be interfered with under Article 227
