Mumbai Property Dispute: Appellate Court Upholds Eviction Of Tenant After 28-Year-Old Case Over Illegal Alterations, Change Of Use

Mumbai: A 28-year-old property dispute, originally filed in 1997, has reached its conclusion after the appellate court upheld the 2019 eviction order passed by the trial court against tenant Sharad Prabhakar Nileshwar (62).

No landlord consent for changes

The Court of Small Causes at Mumbai (Bandra Branch) dismissed Nileshwar’s appeal, maintaining that he had carried out permanent alterations to the rented premises and changed its use without the landlord’s permission.

Permanent alterations without approval

“The judgment and decree passed by learned trial court is legal, proper and correct. Therefore, there is no need of the interference,” observed the bench presided over by Additional Chief Judge A. A. Ayachit and Judge D. R. Mali.

In its 27-page judgment, the court noted that Nileshwar had failed to produce any evidence showing he had obtained written consent from landlord Rajesh Bhansali, owner of Bhansali Bhuvan, situated at North South Road No. 10, J.V.P.. Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), to start a dental clinic or change the premises’ use.

Addressing the defence argument that the presence of the landlord’s father at the clinic’s inauguration in 1997 implied permission, the court stated , “Whether the presence of plaintiff’s father at the time of inaugural function of clinic in 1997 can be construed as express or implied permission for change of user or as a waiver of legal rights under the tenancy agreement and law is a big question. For the reasons above, the answer, unequivocally, is in the negative. In case of change of user, even such change of user with the consent of the landlord is also not permissible.”

Citing the precedent Gopalkrishna Ganpat Gulve (deceased) & Anr. v. Shobhachand Raychand Firodiya, the court reiterated that premises let for a specific purpose must be used only for that purpose, and any deviation amounts to a breach of tenancy.

Breach of tenancy terms

The court held that Nileshwar had undertaken structural changes without consent, including breaking the wall between the WC and bathroom to create a single unit, converting the kitchen into a bedroom, using a passage as a kitchen, enclosing a balcony with brick masonry, and raising the ground level by 1–1½ feet.

On the issue of change of use, the court found that the premises—originally let for residential purposes—were used for commercial purposes as Nileshwar’s wife, Dr. Neena Sharad Nileshwar, operated a dental clinic there.

Also Watch:

Mumbai News: FIR Filed Against Real Estate Developers For Selling ULC Flats Without Society Consent, Loss Over ₹5 Crore

Eviction order upheld

“We come to the conclusion that the plaintiff has proved that the defendant has carried out additions and alterations of permanent nature without permission of the plaintiff and thereby caused waste and damage to the suit premises. The defendant has changed the user of the suit premises from residential to commercial and also committed breach of the terms and conditions of the tenancy,” the court concluded, affirming the trial court’s decree of eviction.