Vithal Ramchandra Otawkar and Ors. v. Raj Vatsa and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
In a civil revision application challenging eviction orders passed by lower courts due to non-payment of rent and alleged permanent alterations, the High Court rejected the applicants' appeal. The court upheld the lower court's finding that provisions of the Bombay Rents Act were not complied with, thus refusing to interfere with the eviction decree.
What did the court decide?
The eviction decree is not to be executed for a period of one year from today, upon undertaking by the applicants and adults residing in the suit premises.
What the court decided
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.391 OF 2009
Vithal Ramchandra Otawkar & Ors... Applicants
V/s.
Raj Vatsa & Ors... Respondents
Mr. G.S. Godbole i/b. M/s. Joy Legal
Consultants for the Applicants.
Mr. Vivek Kantawala i/b. Mr. V.K. Sharma
for Respondent No.2.
CORAM :SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.
DATED :18TH DECEMBER, 2009.
P.C.:
1.The applicants have approached this Court
contending that the orders passed by both the
Courts below directing them to vacate the suit
premises are incorrect and ought to be set aside.
According to the applicants, the decree of the
trial Court on the ground of non payment of rent
and on the ground of carrying out permanent
alterations must be set aside since the findings
are contrary to the evidence on record.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the decree for eviction based on non-payment of rent and permanent alterations should be set aside.
Whether applicants, being nominal members of the Society, are required to pay rent under the Bombay Rents Act.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Vithal Ramchandra Otawkar & Ors
- respondent
Raj Vatsa & Ors
Coram
Nishita Mhatre
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court