NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. vs M/S. GITA CORPORATION Advocate - Yash K Agrawal — CRA/244/2026

Case under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 07th May 2026.

CNR: HCBM010178642026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

CRA/10375/2026

Filing Date

08-04-2026

Registration No

CRA/244/2026

Registration Date

17-04-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

Bench Type

Single

Category

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATIONS ( 67 )

Sub-Category

Against Order of Presidency / Provincial Small Causes Courts under the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999

Petitioner(s)

NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD.

Adv. KUNAL CHHEDA

Respondent(s)

M/S. GITA CORPORATION Advocate - Yash K Agrawal

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

23-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

30-04-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

Orders

07-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE

Case Summary: CRA 244/2026 National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. M/s. Gita Corporation The High Court of Bombay set aside the lower courts' mesne profits award of Rs.12,14,660/month, reducing it to Rs.5,80,000/month with 6% interest for the period June 1, 2010 to November 16, 2014. The court found the respondent's valuation report fundamentally flawed—it compared a rear-located godown without road frontage to premium commercial shops in high-value areas like Napean Sea Road and Opera House, and relied on hypothetical improvements unsupported by evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRA 244/2026 National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. M/s. Gita Corporation The High Court of Bombay set aside the lower courts' mesne profits award of Rs.12,14,660/month, reducing it to Rs.5,80,000/month with 6% interest for the period June 1, 2010 to November 16, 2014. The court found the respondent's valuation report fundamentally flawed—it compared a rear-located godown without road frontage to premium commercial shops in high-value areas like Napean Sea Road and Opera House, and relied on hypothetical improvements unsupported by evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case