Petitioner landlord sought fixation of fair rent. Court found tenant vacated premises and no evidence showed insufficient rent was paid. Finding of authorities not disturbed. Writ petition dismissed.
Rule discharged. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3599/1997
Kishore Jairam Dhoke and another
..versus..
Sudhakar S. Tantrapale
=-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==
Mr. V.G.Bhamburkar, counsel for petitioner. None for respondent.
C ORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 16th AUGUST, 2010.
P.C.
Heard.
Rule was issue don 19.3.1999 without any interim relief in favour of the petitioner/landlord.
2/Learned counsel for the petitioner/landlord informs, the aftermath of several proceedings has ultimately culminated in tenant vacating the premises. The controversy now revolves about fair rent to be fixed in respect of premises occupied by the tenant.
3/I have gone through the observations of the learned Rent Controller and that of Additional Collector, Amravati. The learned Authorities found that there was
2
nothing to reveal that the payment of rent paid by the tenant/respondent was insufficient and to involve interference in the fixation of fair rent.- It was found and not now controverted that the tenant has left the premises having occupied his own house.
4/Taking these aspects into consideration, in the absence of any cogent and coherent evidence for fixation of fair rent, being so established by the landlord, before authorities, the discretion that has been exercised by both the Courts, need not be disturbed in writ jurisdiction, as it does not demonstrate any perversity or illegality in the approach of both the Authorities.
5/Writ petition lacks merit. Dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs.
(K.U.Chandiwal) JUDGE.
Rvjalit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there was perversity or illegality in the approach of the Authorities regarding the fixation of fair rent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kishore Jairam Dhoke and another
Sudhakar S. Tantrapale
K.U. Chandiwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
