My father purchased two ready built apartments in 1954 in the Malabar Hills area of Mumbai. He used one apartment as a family residence and rented out the other apartment to the Burma Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Company of India. The company was nationalised in 1962 and is currently operating under the name of the Bharat Petroleum Company. My father passed away in 1964 and the ownership of both the flats was transferred in my mother's name. I am the only child of my parents. I got married in 1980 and have three children. However, I was widowed in 1989 and have been living since then in a rented apartment in the northern suburbs of the city. All my children are minor in age and I freelance as an interior decorator to support them. I have no close relations from my husband's side and my natural support system is my mother. She too needs me as she is now in her seventies and not able to completely manage on her own.
For the past 10 years, my mother has been trying to get Bharat Petroleum to vacate our flat so that my children and I can move into the same building as her. However, despite being clearly told that my mother's apartment is not big enough to accommodate all of us, the company has neglected to consider her case on compassionate grounds and vacate the flat, which is indeed required for our own use.
Now that the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, has been promulgated as of March 31, 2000, and the protection previously available to corporate tenants under the Bombay Rent Act, 1958, withdrawn, please advise us on the course of action that my mother should adopt to have the flat vacated.
-M Kalianivala, MUMBAIUnder the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, which stands repealed as of March 31, 2000, with the promulgation of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, yet another category of tenants has been added to the classification of tenants specified under the Bombay Rent Act, 1947. The Act now broadly classifies tenants under two groups-those who are protected under the Maharashtra Rent Act and those who are not. The unprotected classes of tenants are described under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Rent Act, 1999. The list includes banks, public sector undertakings, corporations established by or under any Central or state act, foreign missions, international agencies, multinational companies and private/public limited companies having a paid-up share capital of Rs 1 crore or more. Pursuant to the provisions incorporated in the new rent act, these tenants are no longer protected from eviction and it is no longer necessary for the landlord to prove any grounds for eviction as was required under Sections 12 and 13 of the repealedBombay Rent Act.
Therefore, the landlord of such a tenant-your mother, for example-will now be able to seek vacation of her unprotected tenant under the act by merely terminating the tenancy in writing and giving the company one full calender month's notice. In the event the tenant chooses to ignore the tenancy termination notice, she will have to file a suit for eviction in the small causes court at Mumbai.
If such a tenant is already a statutory tenant under the repealed Bombay Rent Act, then even a fresh notice terminating the tenancy is not required and the landlord is at liberty to file an eviction suit in the court of small causes at Mumbai.
In the case of contractual tenants whose lease or agreement of tenancy is subsisting, the landlord has to merely give a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act before filing any suit of eviction against such a tenant.
I would however suggest that your mother seek case specific legal advice once again in the light of the new rent act and act in consonance with the advice that she may receive from her lawyers.
Copyright © 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.