Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
8 judgments · newest first · showing 1–8
The parties entered into a ten‑year tenancy agreement for godowns that contained an arbitration clause. When the lease expired, the landlord sought possession and invoked the arbitration clause, appointing an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The tenant …
The appellant, a landlord, obtained an eviction order and a decree for monthly compensation against the tenant (respondent No.1) under Section 13A(2) of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947. After possession was handed over, the tenant failed to pay the compensation and purportedly transferred the flat to her …
The landlord (Mis. S.F. Engineer) sought eviction of its tenant Metal Box India Ltd. and the tenant's former employee under Section 13(1)(e) of the Bombay Rent Act, alleging unlawful sub‑letting. The trial and appellate courts held that the tenant had not part‑ed with legal possession nor received …
The plaintiff, a landlady, leased a shop to the tenant (defendant No.1) for a grocery business. The tenant allegedly sublet the premises to a milk vendor (defendant No.2) and failed to use the shop for its intended purpose for more than six months before the suit, as shown by electricity bills, a …
The Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai, as landlord, sued M/s Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Pvt. Ltd. (tenant) and its sub‑tenant Wadi Sunder Cotton Press Co. for eviction on the ground of unlawful sub‑letting under the Bombay Rent Act, 1947. The trial court and the High Court held that the sub‑lease …
FGP Ltd., a public limited company, occupied a flat in Mumbai under a tenancy agreement dated 16‑07‑1981. The legal representatives of the original owner filed a suit for possession under the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, claiming reasonable and bona‑fide requirement; the Small Causes Court, the appellate …
The appellants, licensees of certain premises in Greater Bombay, filed suits for permanent injunction in the City Civil Court to prevent the licensor‑defendants from forcibly evicting them. The defendants challenged the City Civil Court’s jurisdiction, arguing that under Section 41(1) of the …
Dr. S.A. Johari, an honorary surgeon attached to Dr. Amonkar Hospital, occupied a small cabin within the hospital premises and paid a monthly compensation. The Amonkar family, owners of the premises, gave notice terminating his attachment and sought his eviction. Johari filed a suit claiming he was …
