To which premises does Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, apply?

The term 'premises' has been defined under section 7(9) as 'any building or part of a building, let or given on licence separately (other than a farm building) including,-(i) the gardens, grounds, garages and out-houses, if any, appurtenant to such building or part of a building, (ii) any fittings affixed to such building or part of a building for the more beneficial enjoyment thereof, but does not include a room or other accommodation in a hotel or lodging house.' Section 2 of the Act deals with the applicability of the Act. Under this section, the Act applies to following categories: The premises let for the purposes of residence, education, business, trade or storage in the cities and towns of Maharashtra, specified in Schedule I and Schedule II to the Act. The Act shall also apply to the premises or, as the case may be, houses let out in the areas to which the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 or the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, issued under the Central Provinces and Berar Regulation of Letting of Accommodation Act, 1946 and the Hyderabad Houses (Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954 were extended and applied before the date of commencement of this Act, and such premises or houses continue to be so let on that date in such areas which are specified in Schedule I to this Act. This applies even if such area ceases to be of the description therein specified. The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct the following: This Act shall not apply to any of the areas specified in Schedule 1 or Schedule II or that it shall not apply to any one or all purposes specified in sub-section (1); This Act shall apply to any premises that are let for any or all purposes, specified in sub-section (1), in the areas other than those specified in Schedule 1 and Schedule II.

Which are the premises applicability of the Act?

that

are

exempted

from

the

Section 3 of the Act states that itt shall not apply to the following cases: to premises, belonging to the government or a local authority; to properties taken on behalf of the government on the basis of tenancy, licence or other like relationship by, or in the name of any officer, subordinate to the government. However, it does apply to premises let or, given on licence, to the government or, a local authority or, taken on behalf of the government, by or, in the name of such officer; to premises let or, sub let to (i) banks (ii) public sector undertakings; (iii) corporations, established by any Central or State Act, (iv) foreign missions; (v) international agencies; (vi) multinational companies; and (vii) private or public limited companies, having a paid up share capital of Rs.1 crore, or more.

Section 3 (1) (b) of the Act exempts ''the banks or public undertakings, multinational companies etc., having a paid up share capital of Rs. 1 crore or more, from the protection of the Act. This means that that the Act shall not apply to any premises, let or sub-let to banks, or any Public Sector Undertakings or any Corporation established by or under any Central or State Act, or foreign missions, international agencies, multinational companies, and private limited companies and public limited companies, having a paid up share capital of rupees one crore or more.'' The effect of this is that banks, public sector undertakings etc. cannot claim protection and have to vacate the premises as soon as the contractual period is over. Whether such a bank or a public sector undertaking was a tenant or a licencee or a lessee, once any contractual period of use is over, it is not entitled to stay in the premises. In Bhanumati Mansukhlal Shah and others v. Central Bank of India, the Small Causes Court of Bombay commented that 'the legislature chose to exempt affluent tenants like banks, or any Public Sector undertakings or any Corporation, established by or under any Central or State Act, Foreign missions, International agencies, Multinational Companies, Private limited companies and Public limited companies, having a paid up share capital of more than rupee one crore or more, from protection under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act,1999 and will have to vacate the premises as soon as the contractual period is over.'

Is the State Government vested with any discretionary power to exempt any category of persons or premises from the purview of the Act? The State government may direct that all or any of the provisions of this Act, subject to any conditions or terms as may be specified by the Government, shall not apply to the following categories: Premises used for charitable purposes; Premises, held by the public sector for charitable and religious purposes, which are let out at a nominal rent; Premises, held by a public trust for a charitable or religious purpose and, administered by a local authority; Premises, belonging to or, vested in a university, established by law, for time being in force. However, before making such direction it is the statutory duty of the Government to make sure that the interest of the existing tenants is not adversely affected.

Are there any premises to which the Standard Rent provisions do not apply? Section 6 of the Act states that the provisions related to the standard rent and permitted increase; do not apply if, from the commencement of the new Rent Act i.e. 30th March 2000, the premises are not given on rent or licence, for a continuous period of one year. This section applies even if the premise is newly constructed or old. The section also provides for the exceptions to the non-application of the provisions that are related to the standard rent and permitted increase: The premises vacated for demolition or reconstruction; The premises, constructed or reconstructed, by the government, or the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) or, any of its boards.

Who are the persons included under the term 'tenant'?

The word 'Tenant' is defined in Section 7(15) of the Rent Act. It includes any person by whom or, on whose account, rent is payable, for any premises. It, also, includes the following persons: a tenant; a person who become tenant on the commencement of the Act Section 25; a sub-tenant, as permitted under a contract or, by the permission or, consent of the landlord; a person who has derived title under the tenant; It also includes a person, to whom interest in the premises has been assigned or, transferred, as permitted, by virtue of, or under the provisions of any of the repealed Acts; With regard to any premises, when the tenant dies, whether the death occurred before or after the commencement of this Act, to any of the following members of the tenant's family: where the premises are rented for residence, is residing, where the premises are rented for education, business, trade or storage, is using the premises for any such purpose; at the time of the tenant's death, any heir of the deceased tenant, as may be decided, in the absence of agreement, by the court. Explanation: The provisions of this clause for transmission of tenancy shall not be restricted to the death of the original tenant, but shall apply, even on the death of any subsequent tenant, who becomes tenant under these provisions, on the death of the last preceding tenant.

What is Standard Rent? Standard Rent, in relation to premises, falls into the following categories: The Standard Rent is fixed by the court or, the Controller, as the case may be, under the earlier laws (such as the Bombay Rent Restriction Act, 1939; the Bombay Rents, Hotel Rates, and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1944 and the Bombay Rents, Hotel Rates, and Lodging House Rates Control Act,1947 and the Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 issued under the

Central Provinces and Berar Regulation of Letting of Accommodation Act, 1946 or the Hyderabad Houses ( Rent, Eviction and Lease) Control Act, 1954) on the basis of such rent, plus an increase of 5%; But where the Standard Rent or, fair rent, is not so fixed, the rent at which the premises were let on 1st October, 1987. If the premises were not let on 1st of October, 1987, the rent at which they were, last, let before that date plus 5%; or, Standard Rent may be fixed by the court, in the following cases: Where the rent, prevailing on or before 1st October, 1987, can not be ascertained; Where, by reason of the premises having been let at one time, as a whole or, in part or for any other reason; Where the premises have been let, rent free or, for a nominal rent or, for a consideration in addition to rent; Where there is a dispute, regarding Standard Rent, between the landlord and the tenant. Either the landlord or the tenant can apply for the fixation of Standard rent and permitted increase to the court under section 8 of the Act. The court shall, in the above cases, fix the standard rent and permitted increase. However, a court shall not fix standard rent or permitted increase if the rent has been already fixed by a competent court on the merits of the court and there are no structural alterations or change in the amenities or any change in any other factors that are relevant to the fixation of standard rent.

Can a paying guest claim protection under the new Rent Act? The term 'paying guest' is defined in section 7(7) of the Act which means a person, not being a member of a family, who is given a part of the premises in which the licensor resides on licence. The Mahartashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 does not protect the paying guests.

Are all agreements of tenancy or, leave & licence required to be registered after 31st March 2000?

Yes, it is provided by Section 55 that any agreement of tenancy or, leave and licence, entered into after 31 st March, 2000, must be in writing and, registered under the Registration Act, 1908. The landlord is responsible for getting the agreement. If he commits any default, he is liable to suffer imprisonment up to 3 months or, fine up to Rs.5,000/= or, both. Further, in the absence of a written registered agreement, the tenant's version of the terms and conditions of the agreement shall prevail, unless otherwise proved.

What is the registration fee charged on a document of leave and licence? By a special notification dated 08-March-2000, the state government has fixed the fees as follows: If the property is situated: within the limits of a Municipal Corporation, Rs.5,000/in any other area Rs.500/-

Will a Business Service (Centre) Agreement be registerable under the Act? A Business Service would require registration under the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999, as such agreements are not agreements between landlord and tenant or, licensor and licensee, relating to premises but, are agreements in the matter of providing services, such as telephone, telex, mail, secretarial staff etc. and, incidental to these services, a cabin or room is made available to the person, availing of such facilities. However, if what is given on licence are premises and, incidental to the occupation of such premises, facilities, such as telephone, telex, mail, computer, Secretarial Staff etc., are provided, then, such an agreement would require registration under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

Is it illegal for a landlord to charge a rent which is in excess of the standard rent? Section 10 of the Act makes it illegal to claim or receive any increase above the standard rent and permitted increase on account of rent. There are exceptions to the sections: If the premises are not given on rent or licence, for a continuous period of one year from the commencement of the new Rent Act i.e. 30 th March 2000, by virtue of section 6 of the Act, the provisions related to the standard rent and permitted increase do not apply to these premises, whether the premise is newly constructed or old. Thus, it will be legal if the landlord charges rent above standard rent and permitted increase. If the landlord was entitled to recover such increase by virtue of, or under the provisions of any of the repealed Act before the coming into operation of this Act, or is entitled to recover such increase under the provisions of this Act, he can take the rent excess to the standard rent and permitted increase.

Can a landlord increase the rent on account of improvement? The landlord, by virtue of section 11(1) of the Act, is entitled to make an increase of 4% per annum in the rent after the commencement of the Act. The period of one year, on completion of which rent shall be so increased, shall be computed from the date of commencement of this Act. This increase is permitted only in respect of the premises, let for the purposes of residence, education, business, trade or storage. A landlord shall be entitled to make such increase in the rent of the premises only if the alterations or improvements have taken place with the consent of seventy per cent of the tenants. This consent has to be given in writing. The increase should be reasonable for an improvement or structural alterations of the premises as stated by section 11(2) of the Act. The improvements and alterations, mentioned here, do not include repairs, which the landlord is bound to make under sub-section (1) of section 14.

What is the permissible income in rent, with regard to special additions to premises or, special alterations made, therein?

By Section 11(3) of the Act, it is provided that a landlord is entitled to make an increase in the rent by an amount, not exceeding 15% per annum, of the expenses incurred in making special additions or, special alterations or, providing additional amenities. The total expenses, incurred, will have to be certified by the Municipal Authorities or, by an architect from the panel of architects, notified by the state government for the purposes of the Rent Act. This 15% per annum is permitted to be added to the rent till the landlord recovers the entire expenses, so incurred by him. According to section 11(4) of the Act,,the landlord shall also be further entitled to make a temporary increase in the rent of premises by an addition to the rent on account of special or structural repairs made by him. The rate of this increase must not exceed 25% the standard rent. The increase of rent shall be payable from the date of completion of the repairs till the amount of the expenditure for such repairs is recovered from the tenant. Such increase in rent shall be recoverable from all tenants, who occupy premises in the building, on the basis of the actual expenses incurred as specified in a certificate from the municipal authority or the architect. The amount to be recovered from each tenant shall be in the same proportion as the rent payable by him in respect of his premises.

What is a landlord required to do before making any increase in rent, with regard to "expenses incurred" for additions, alterations, improvements or, amenities of the premises? Before making any increase as stated above, the landlord shall obtain in the prescribed manner and in the prescribed form, a declaration from the prescribed authority or a certificate from an architect from a panel of architects, notified by the State Government for the purposes of this Act, asserting that it is necessary to undertake such repairs and specifying the nature and extent of repairs that are required and the estimated cost. After such repairs are carried out, the landlord shall also obtain, in the prescribed manner and in the prescribed form, a certificate from such prescribed authority or such architect confirming that the repairs were carried out in accordance with the declaration or as the case may be, the certificate aforesaid and fixing the date of completion of the repairs and the actual expenses. Is the landlord entitled to increase the rent on account of payment of rates and taxes to government or, local authority?

The landlord is entitled to do increase the rent on account of payment of rates and taxes to government or, local authority under section 12 of the Act provided the increase in the rent does not exceed the amount of any such rate, charges, taxes, land assessment, ground rent of land or, any other levy on lands and buildings, as the case may be. He is, also, entitled to increase charges for electricity and water when the rent is inclusive of such charges, provided such evidence does not exceed the additional amount payable by him with regard to such charges.

What are the circumstances under which the landlord can recover possession of tenanted premises? Section 16 of the Act provides various grounds under which a landlord shall be entitled to recover possession of any premises. The court should be satisfied of the presence of these grounds. These grounds are as follows: If the tenant has committed any act contrary to the provisions of clause (o) of section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 which reads as follows: - "the lessee may use the property and its products (if any) as a person of ordinary prudence would use them if they were his own; but he must not use, or permit another to use, the property for a purpose other than that for which it was leased, or fell or sell timber, pull down or damage buildings belonging to the lessor, or work mines or quarries not open when the lease was granted, or commit any other act which is destructive or permanently injurious thereto;" But replacing of tiles or closing of balcony of the premises is not considered as an act of a causing damage to the building or as being destructive or permanently injurious. The tenant has erected on the premises any permanent structure without the landlord's consent in writing. The expression "permanent structure" does not include the carrying out of any work with the permission, wherever necessary, of the municipal authority, for providing a wooden partition, standing cooking platform in kitchen, door, lattice work or opening of a window necessary for ventilation, a false ceiling, installation of air-conditioner, an exhaust outlet or a smoke chimney. The tenant, his agent, servant, persons inducted by tenant or claiming under the tenant or, any person, residing with the tenant, has been

guilty of conduct which is a nuisance or annoyance to the adjoining or neighbouring occupier, or has been convicted of using the premises or allowing the premises to be used for immoral or illegal purposes or that the tenant has in respect of the premises been convicted of an offence of contravention of any of the provisions of -Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 394; Section 394A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act; Sub-section (1) of section 376 or Section 376A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949; Section 229 of the City of Nagpur Municipal Corporation Act, 1948; Section 280 or of section 281 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965. The tenant has given notice to quit and, in consequence of that notice, the landlord has contracted to sell or let the premises or has taken any other steps, as a result of which he would, in the opinion of the court, be seriously prejudiced if he could not obtain possession of the premises. The tenant has: On or after the 1st day of February 1973, in the areas to which the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 applied; or On or after the commencement of this Act, in the Vidarbha and Marathwada, areas of the State, unlawfully sub-let or given on licence, the whole or part of the premises or assigned or transferred in any other manner his interest therein. That the premises were let to the tenant for use as a residence by reason of his being in the service or employment of the landlord, and that the tenant has ceased, whether before or after commencement of this Act, to be in such service or employment. That the premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for occupation by himself or by any person for whose benefit the premises are held or, where the landlord is a trustee of a public charitable trust that the premises are required for occupation for the purposes of the trust. That the premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for carrying out repairs which cannot be carried out without the premises being vacated.

That the premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for the immediate purpose of demolishing them and such demolition is to be made for the purpose of erecting a new building on the premises that are sought to be demolished. That the premises that are let consist of a tenement or tenements on the terrace of a building. Such tenement or tenements are a part of the total area of the terrace, and that the premises or any part thereof are required by the landlord for the purpose of the demolition thereof and erection or raising of a floor or floors on such terrace. That the premises are required for the immediate purpose of demolition, ordered by any municipal authority or other competent authority. That where the premises comprise of land in the nature of garden or grounds appurtenant to a building or part of a building, such land is required by the landlord for the erection of a new building, which a municipal authority has approved or permitted him to build thereon. That the rent, charged by the tenant for the premises or any part thereof which are sub-let, is in excess of the standard rent and permitted increases in respect of such premises or part or that the tenant has received any fine, premium other like sum of consideration in respect of such premises or part. That the premises have not been used without reasonable cause for the purpose for which they were let for a continuous period of six months, immediately preceding the date of the suit. Is the landlord obliged to intimate to the tenant the date of completion and the tenant's right to occupy the tenement in the new building? The landlord, under section 21 of the Act, is bound by duty to intimate to tenant the date of completion and the tenant''s right to occupy the tenement in the new building. Three months before the date on which the erection of the new building or, new floor or floors, as the case may be, is likely to be completed, the landlord shall intimate to the tenant the date on which the said erection shall be completed. On the said date, the tenant shall be entitled to occupy the premises assigned to him by the landlord. If the tenant fails to occupy the premises within a period of one month from the date on which he is entitled to occupy, the tenant's right to occupy the said premises under this section i.e. section 21(1) shall terminate. On termination of this period, the landlord shall be entitled

to recover from the tenant a sum, equal to three times the amount of the monthly standard rent, in respect of the premises. If the landlord fails, without reasonable excuse, to give a notice as required under section 20(1) or to place the tenant in occupation of the premises, he shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine, which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both. When the period of leave and licence has expired, if the licensee does not vacate, what remedy is available to the licensor? Under Section 24 of the Act, it is provided that on the expiry of the period of licence, the landlord shall be entitled to recover possession of the premises by making an application to the Competent Authority. If the licensee does not vacate the premises on expiry of the licence, and, the landlord is compelled to apply to the Competent Authority to evict the licensee, the licensee is liable to pay damages at thrice the rate of the licence fee.

Is it legal for the landlord or the tenant to receive a premium or pagdi, for tenanted premises? Yes, Section 56 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, legalised the acceptance of a fine, premium or, consideration (pagdi). The Section is in two parts. After 31 st March, 2000, it is lawful for the tenant or, a person acting on his behalf, to receive consideration for relinquishment, transfer or, assignment, of the tenancy of any premises. Similarly it is lawful for the landlord or, any person acting on his behalf, to receive a fine, premium (pagdi) or deposit, for granting or renewing a lease or for transferring the lease to another person. Can one of the co-owners of the tenanted premises file a suit on the grounds of bonafide requirement? Under the provisions of the new Rent Act, a suit under Section 16(1) (g), for recovery of possession, on the ground of bona fide requirement, can be filed, only, by the owner of the premises. By the explanation to Section 16(2), the definition of landlord for the purposes of a suit under Section 16(1) (g) does not include a rent farmer, rent collector or estate manager. A co-owner, with the consent of the other owners, can file a suit for recovery of possession under Section 16(1) (g) of the Rent Act.

I am a landlord and my tenant has acquired alternate accommodation in the same locality. Will I be able to recover possession of the tenanted premises from the tenant on this ground? No. Under the provisions of the old Rent Act of 1947, under Section 13(1)(1), the landlord could recover possession of tenanted premises if, after coming into force of that Act, the tenant had built, acquired vacant possession of or, been allotted a suitable residence. However, this particular ground for recovery of possession is not available under the present Rent Act. I am the landlord and my tenant has not paid rent for the last 10 months, in spite of my sending a notice demanding rent. In order to file a suit for eviction against the said tenant, is a fresh notice, contemplated under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, necessary? It may be necessary to issue a fresh Notice of Demand if the earlier Notice of Demand has been served on the tenant, as provided by Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. However, a suit can be filed only after the expiry of 90 days from receipt of Notice of Demand, by the tenant Can residential premises be converted into commercial premises by a landlord? A landlord is prohibited under section 30 of the Act from using or permitting the use of any premises for commercial purpose which on the date of the commencement of this Act, were used for a residential purpose. Any landlord, who contravenes allows or does such conversion of residential premises into commercial premises shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both. A landlord has been directed by the Municipal authority to execute the work of additions, alterations, improvement, etc., but has failed to comply with the requisition. What can a tenant do? If the landlord does not carry out the work, as required by the Municipal Authorities, the tenant or tenants, interested in doing such work, may do it with the prior approval of the Municipal Authority. The expenses, incurred by the tenant, shall be binding on the authority and, the tenant may recover these expenses, by deducting the amounts from the rent, which from time to time, is due by them or, otherwise, recover such amounts from the landlord.

If such work is jointly executed by the tenants, the amount to be deducted or recovered by each tenant shall bear the same proportion as the rent payable by him in respect of his premises. The total amount, so deducted or recoverable, shall not exceed the amount of expenses that are incurred for such work. Can a landlord eject a tenant even if the tenant pays or is ready to pay the rent? A landlord is not entitled to the recovery of possession of any premises so long as the tenant pays, or is ready and willing to pay, the amount of the, standard rent and permitted increases and observes and performs the terms and conditions of the tenancy, in so far as they are consistent with the provisions of this Act. Section 15 of the Act is a provision which provides relief to a tenant against eviction. It is protective in nature. A suit for recovery of possession can be instituted by a landlord against the tenant on grounds of non-payment of standard rent or permitted increases that are due. Suit for recovery can only be instituted after the expiration of ninety days from the date of notice of demand of the standard rent or permitted increase. This has to be served upon a tenant in writing. A court cannot pass a decree for eviction in any suit for the recovery of possession on the ground of arrears of standard rent and permitted increases if, within a period of ninety days from the date of service of the summons of the suit, the tenant pays or tenders in court the standard rent and permitted increases that are due, together with simple interest on the amount of arrears at fifteen per cent per annum. Thereafter, he must continue to pay or tender in court regularly such standard rent and permitted increases till the suit is finally decided and also pays the cost of the suit as directed by the court. During the pendancy of such suits, the court may, out of any amount that is paid or tendered by the tenant, pay to the landlord such amount towards the payment of rent or permitted increases due to him as the court thinks fit. Is tenant entitled to get back the premise that has been recovered by the landlord on the ground of bona fide repairs? The tenant is entitled to get the premises back in the premise that has been recovered by the landlord on the ground of bona fide repairs only if the provisions under section 17 of the Act are complied with. When the court shall not pass a decree on the ground that the premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for

carrying out repairs that cannot be carried out without the premises being vacated, unless it ascertains from the tenant whether he elects to be placed in occupation of the premises or part thereof from which he is to be evicted. If the tenant so elects, the court shall record the fact of the election, in the decree and specify in the decree the date on or before which the tenant shall deliver possession so as to enable the landlord to commence the work of repairs. If the tenant delivers possession on or before the date specified in the decree, the landlord shall, two months before the date on which the work of repairs is likely to be completed, give notice to the tenant of the date on which the said work shall be completed. Within thirty days from the date of receipt of such notice the tenant shall intimate to the landlord his acceptance of the accommodation offered and deposit with the landlord rent for one month. If the tenant gives such intimation and makes the deposit, the landlord shall, on completion of the work of repairs, place the tenant in occupation of the premises or part thereof. Such tenancy continues on the terms and conditions existing on the date of the passing of the decree for eviction. If the tenant fails to give such intimation and to make the deposit, the tenant's right to occupy the premises shall terminate. If, after the tenant has delivered possession on or before the date specified in the decree, the landlord fails to commence the work of repairs within one month of the specified date or fails to complete the work within a reasonable time or having completed the work fails to place the tenant in occupation of the premises the court may, on the application of the tenant made within one year of the specified date, order the landlord to place him in occupation of the premises or part. This tenancy shall continue on the terms and conditions existing on the date of passing of the decree for eviction. On such order being made, the landlord and any person who may be in occupation shall give vacant possession to the tenant of the premises or part thereof. Any landlord who, when the tenant has vacated by the date specified in the decree, without reasonable excuse fails to commence the work of repairs and any landlord or other person in occupation of the premises who fails to comply with the order made by the court as stated above under sub-section (3) of 17, shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both. Is tenant entitled to get back the premise that has been recovered by the landlord on the ground of bona fide requirement of the landlord?

Where a decree for eviction has been passed by the court on the ground that:

The premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for occupation by himself or By any person for whose benefit the premises are held or Where the landlord is a trustee of a public charitable trust that the premises are required for occupation for the purposes of the trust,

And if the premises are not occupied within a period of one month from the date of recovery of possession by the landlord or the premises are re-let within one year of the said date to any person other than the original tenant, the court may order the landlord to place the tenant in occupation of the premises on the application made by the original tenant. The application should be made by the tenant within thirteen months from completion of one month's period from the date of recovery of possession. Such tenancy restarts on the same terms and conditions existing on the date of passing of the decree for eviction. On such order being made by the court, the landlord and any person who may be in occupation of the premises shall give vacant possession to the original tenant. Any landlord or a person in possession of the premises in respect of which the order has been passed, if does not comply with the order on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both. Is the tenant entitled to reclaim the premises that have been recovered by the landlord on the grounds of demolishing a building and he does not commence within the stipulated period? Where a decree for eviction has been passed by the court on the any of the following grounds:

that the premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for the immediate purpose of demolishing them and such demolition is to be made for the purpose of erecting a new building on the premises sought to be demolished; that the premises that are let consist of a tenement or tenements on the terrace of a building, such tenement or tenements being only in part of the total area of the terrace, and that the premises or any part thereof are required by the landlord for the purpose of the demolition thereof and erection or raising of a floor or floors on such terrace;

The tenant is entitled to regain the possession if the following conditions exist:

the work of demolishing the premises has not been commenced by the landlord even after one month has passed, and shall be completed within three months, from the date that he recovers possession of the entire premises; the tenant may give the landlord notice of his intention to occupy the premises from which he has been evicted; if the landlord does not forthwith deliver to him vacant possession of the premises on the same terms and conditions on which he occupied them before the eviction, the tenant may make an application to the court within six weeks from the date on which he delivered vacant possession of the premises to the landlord.

If the court is satisfied that the landlord has not substantially commenced the work of demolishing the premises within the period of one month, in accordance with his undertaking, the court shall order the landlord to deliver to the tenant vacant possession of the premises on the terms and conditions on which he occupied them immediately before the eviction. On such order being made, the landlord shall forthwith deliver vacant possession of the premises to the tenant. Any landlord, who recovers possession on the above grounds but does not comply with the time frame stated there or, does not comply with the Court's orders, on conviction, will be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to thirty days or with fine, which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both. Does a tenant have the right to give notice to the landlord of his intention to occupy a tenement in the new building that is constructed on the demolished premises? Where a decree for eviction has been passed by the court on the ground that the premises are reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord for the immediate purpose of demolishing them, and such demolition is to be made for the purpose of erecting a new building on the premises sought to be demolished, the tenant has a right to give a notice, under section 20 of the Act, to the landlord of his intention to occupy a tenement in the new building on its completion. Such notice should be given by the tenant within six months from the date on which he delivered vacant possession of the premises to the landlord. He should state in the notice the following: 1. That he shall pay to the landlord the standard rent in respect of the tenement; 2. That his occupation of the tenement shall be on the same terms and conditions on which he occupied the premises immediately before the eviction.

Can certain sub-tenants become tenants on determination of tenancy? In case any sub-tenancy agreement exists at the time of commencement of this act, or if sub-tenancy is permitted by the landlord, the sub-tenant may become a tenant on the discontinuance of the original tenancy by virtue of section 25 of the Act. This means that the sub-tenant steps into the shoes of the original tenant if the original tenancy agreement ceases to have force. I own a flat and have rented it to a couple. However, I find that they have re-rented a room in the flat to another person. Are they permitted to do this? What can I do about this? The law is very clear as far as this issue is concerned. The Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 in section 26 states that no person is, lawfully, permitted to sub-let or, give on licence, the whole or, any part of the premises let to him or, to assign or, transfer in any other manner, his interest, therein, unless there is a contract between the landlord and himself, permitting him to do so. Thus, the law does not forbid the creation of a sub-tenancy, if the landlord permits it. However, without such permission, a sub-tenancy becomes illegal. Is a landlord entitled to inspect premises during the continuation of tenancy or leave and license? Under section 28 of the Act, the landlord is entitled to inspect the premises that are let or given on leave and license at reasonable intervals. However, such inspection is allowed only on prior notice to the occupier or the licensee or the tenant as the case may be. Does the tenant have any remedy, if any essential supply or service, enjoyed by him, is cut off or, withheld by the landlord? A landlord cannot cut-off, or withhold any essential supply or service, enjoyed by the tenant, in respect of premises that are let to the tenant. If any essential supply or service is cut off or withheld, then the tenant can make an application for restoration of the essential supply or service under Section 29. The application can be made, jointly by all or, any of the tenants of premises situated in the same building. The court may pass an interim order, even before giving the landlord notice of the enquiry, directing the landlord to restore the essential supply,

before a specified date. If the landlord fails to restore the supply within the time specified, the court, conducting the enquiry, may fine him up to Rs.100/- per day, for which the default continues. What remedy does the tenant have, if the landlord fails to issue proper receipts, in respect of payments made towards rent of any premises? Under Section 31, it is made mandatory that the landlord shall issue a receipt for any amount received by him, in respect of any premises. Failure to issue a receipt is an offence, punishable with fine which may extend to Rs.100/-, for each day of default. I am a tenant and I am in arrears of rent for the past 10 months. I have also failed to comply with the demand notice sent by the landlord. Now the landlord has filed a suit against me on grounds of default. What remedy is available to me? Within 90 days from the receipt of the summons of the suit, you must pay to the landlord or, deposit in court, all the rent and permitted increases, due up to the date of payment, or, deposit in court, together with simple interest on that amount, at 15% per annum. You must, further, continue to pay or, deposit in court, the rent and permitted increases, till the disposal of this rent and, pay the costs of the suit, as directed by the court. If the above two requirements are fulfilled, no decree for eviction shall be passed against you. I am a tenant. Can I relinquish or, transfer, my tenancy rights for a consideration? Is it lawful to do so? Yes, under the old Act, it was unlawful for the tenant to receive any sum or consideration for the relinquishment, transfer or assignment of his tenancy. However, clause (i) of Section 56 of the present Rent Act, has removed this bar. Now, you, as a tenant, can claim or, receive any sum or, consideration, lawfully, for the transfer of the tenancy.

Under what circumstances does the court fix the Standard Rent or permitted increases? The Standard Rent of any premises may be fixed by the Court on an application, made in that behalf to the court or, on any suit or, proceedings before it, in the following cases:

The court finds that there is no evidence of the rent (i) at which premises were let on 1 st October 1987; or (ii)

where the premises were not let on 1 st October 1987, the rent at which they were last let before 1 st October 1987;

Whereby reason of the premises having been let at one time, as a whole or, in parts and, at another time, in parts or, as a whole, or, for any other reasons; Where the premises have been let free of charge, or, at a nominal rent, or, for other consideration, in addition to rent; Where there is a dispute between landlord and tenant, regarding the amount of Standard Rent.

Is court entitled to the award compensation in case it finds that the suit is not bona fide? Under section 36 the court can award compensation to the defendant or opponent if the Court finds that any suit, proceeding or application instituted or made before it is false, frivolous or vexatious. The court may, after hearing the plaintiff or applicant and for reasons to be recorded, order such plaintiff or applicant to pay compensation. Such compensation cannot exceed two thousand rupees. When will the court refuse to entertain an application for fixing Standard Rent? The court will refuse to entertain applications for fixing Standard Rent, if the Standard Rent has already been fixed in the following manner:

It is fixed by a competent court, on the merits of the case, There was no fraud, collusion or, error in facts in the earlier case;

There have been no structural alterations or change in the amenities or change in any other relevant factors.

If the Standard Rent is in dispute, is there any recourse to law? Yes, the tenant can make an application for fixation of Standard Rent and permitted increases under Section 8(3) of the Rent Act. Does an appeal lie against an order, made by the Competent Authority for recovery of possession? No appeal lies against an order passed by the Competent Authority for recovery of possession of any premises. Section 44, provides for a revision to be filed by the aggrieved party to the State government or, an Officer so authorized by the State government. The power of revision can be exercised by the State government Sue Moto. In cases of revision by the aggrieved party, the application for revision must be filed within 90 days from the date of the order, sought to be revised. What is the time limit for disposal of suits, proceedings or, appeals, under the new Rent Act? By Section 38, it is provided that all suits or proceedings, filed under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, shall be heard and disposed of, as far as practicable, within a period of 12 months, from the date of service of summons. Appeals under the Act are to be disposed of within 6 months from the date of service of notice of appeal on the Respondent. All applications made before the Competent Authority, under Chapter VIII, are to be disposed of within 6 months of the order, granting leave to defend under Section 43(4)(c). No period for disposal has been provided for Revisions, filed under Section 44 of the Act.

If there is a dispute between landlord and tenant, in respect of premises belonging to a co-operative society, in which court will the suit lie? In a dispute between landlord and tenant, in respect of premises situated in a Co-operative Housing Society, it is the Small Causes Court, Bombay, which would have jurisdiction. When can a suit for recovery of possession be instituted by a landlord, on grounds of non-payment of Standard Rent or, permitted increases due? Under Section 15(1) of the Act, a landlord shall not be entitled to recover possession of premises, as long as the tenant is ready and willing to pay the amount of Standard Rent and permitted increases and, observes and performs the conditions of tenancy. A landlord can file a suit for recovery of possession of premises, on grounds of arrears in payment of rent, only on expiry of 90 days after a notice, demanding the rent, has been served on the tenant, as per Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. What is the procedure followed by the Competent Authority? A special procedure is prescribed by Sections 42 & 43 of the Rent Act. This is designed to reduce delays and ensure that landlords get possession of their premises, without undue delay. Therefore, the procedure is as follows:

The landlord files, with the Competent Authority, an application, verified in the manner prescribed by Order 6, rules 14 and 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure; The Competent Authority shall tenant or, licensee, in the summons may be served, simultaneously, by Registered licensee or, agent empowered issue a summons to the prescribed form. The both personally and, Post, on the tenant or, to accept service. If the

tenant or licensee refuses to accept service of summons by registered post, the Competent Authority may proceed to hear and decide the application as if the summons had been validly served;

The tenant or licensee is not entitled as of right as to defend the application. He must, within 30 days of service of the summons, file an affidavit, stating the grounds on which he is going to contest the complaint and, obtain leave from the Competent Authority to contest the application. If the tenant or licensee does not appear before the Competent Authority, pursuant to the summons, or fails to obtain leave to defend, he shall be deemed to have admitted the landlord's case for eviction and, the landlord will be entitled to the issue of an order for eviction. The Competent Authority shall give leave to defend, if the Affidavit filed by the tenants or, licensee, in reply, discloses such facts as would disentitle the landlord to recover possession. Where leave to defend is given, the Competent Authority shall commence the hearing as soon as possible, proceed from day today and, as far as possible, finish the hearing within 6 months from the order granting leave to defend.

The Competent Authority, while holding an inquiry, shall follow the rules and practice of the Court of Small Causes, including recording of evidence. If a landlord has let any premises to a Doctor / C.A., who is permitted to use part of it as his residence and part of it as his clinic / office, can the landlord file a suit under the Act for the entire property? Yes. If the premises are let for residence and, only a part of the premises are used for professional activities, then the

landlord can file a suit for recovery of the entire premises on any of the grounds, mentioned in Sections 15 and 16 of the Act.