Baitulla Ismail Shaikh And Anr v. Khatija Ismail Panhalkar And Ors 2024 INSC 71

Introduction 

• This case revolves around the applicability and interpretation of Section 15 & 16 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act to establish a better relation between tenant and landlord.  

Facts 

• In this case, the petitioner aggrieved by the decision of Bombay High Court has filed an appeal. 
• The Bombay High court dismissed the petitioner’s plea for eviction of tenant on various grounds such as nonpayment of rent, unauthorized construction and demolition notices from Maharashtra Giristha Municipal Council. 
• The High Court, while giving its order, observed that the tenant was not in strict compliance with the law and set aside the lower court's decree. 
• This led to an appeal filed by the petitioner in the Supreme court. 

Issue Involved  

• Whether court may refuse to grant a decree in the cases of eviction of tenant where eviction may cause hardship to the tenant having regard to all the circumstances? 

Observations 

• The Supreme Court confirmed the findings of the Bombay High Court by referring to various case laws and by referring to the provisions of Section 15 and Section 16 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act,1999 (MRC). 
• It was stated that there was no compliance of the provisions of the MRC Act,1999 by the landlord. 
  • It was stated that there were no such findings which may prove default in payment by tenants. 
  • It was also stated that demolition orders were not for the portion in which tenants used to reside, so no eviction was required. 
  • It was also observed that there were no such constructions by the tenants without the permission of the landlord in the building. 

Conclusion 

• The Supreme Court concluded by dismissing the appeal of petitioner for eviction of tenants and upheld the validity of the decision of the Bombay High Court while stating that the purpose of immediate demolition should be clearly prescribed by the Municipal Council.