Writ Petition No. 3738 of 2010 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 s. 15(3)
Judgment
Heard Shri Parsodkar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Kulkarni, learned counsel for respondents No. 1, 3, 4 & 5. Time was given to the parties to file charts to assist the Court to find out the position of arrears. The charts filed were inadequate and hence further time was given and costs were imposed. Today again though costs are paid, charts are not of any assistance. The perusal of order passed below Exh. 39 by Small Causes Court shows that the effort was made by the petitioner – tenant to deposit rent arrears for the period from 01.09.2005 to 31.08.2008 at a time. The provisions of Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, envisage regular payment of rent. The said provision has not been complied with. It is apparent that a right accrued in favour of the plaintiff – landlord. View taken by both the Courts concurrently is neither erroneous nor perverse. Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. *GS. JUDGE
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.