CHANDRASEN PURSHOTTAM BHIMJI vs KISAN KONDU GAIKWAD — WP/827/2014

Case under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 27-Jun-2014

CNR: HCBM010490642013

Filing Number

WP/33351/2013

Filing Date

03-Dec-2013

Registration No

WP/827/2014

Registration Date

24-Jan-2014

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

Bench Type

Single

Category

RENT ACT ( 34 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 13-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHANDRASEN PURSHOTTAM BHIMJI

    Adv. Advocate- ,Archana Yadav

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KISAN KONDU GAIKWAD

    Adv. ,Ratnesh M Dube,Rutuja Ambekar 1123

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court quashed the appellate judgment declaring Gaikwad a tenant and reinstated the trial court's dismissal of his tenancy suit. The court held that in a tenancy declaration suit, the burden lies on the claimant (tenant) to prove tenancy through rent receipts or agreements—not on the defendant—and that long possession alone cannot establish tenancy. Gaikwad produced no rent receipts, no tenancy agreement, and only salary/payment receipts (not signed by the landlord), while Bhimji's nokar-namas and salary records suggested Gaikwad was employed as a gardener, making the appellate court's reasoning perverse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 22-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

  4. 22-Dec-2025

    For Disposal

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

  5. 11-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

  6. 11-Dec-2025

    For Direction

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

  7. 08-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

  8. 17-Nov-2025

    For Final Hearing

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

  9. 14-Oct-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

  10. 14-Oct-2025

    For Final Hearing

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

  11. 01-Oct-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

  12. 01-Oct-2025

    For Final Hearing

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye

  13. 25-Sep-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. M. SathayeView PDF

  14. 25-Sep-2025

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  15. 04-Sep-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

  16. 24-Jul-2025

    —

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  17. 24-Jul-2025

    —

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  18. 25-Jul-2014

    Hon'ble Shri Justice K.K. TatedView PDF

  19. 27-Jun-2014

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  20. 03-Dec-2013

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/827/2014

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court quashed the appellate judgment declaring Gaikwad a tenant and reinstated the trial court's dismissal of his tenancy suit. The court held that in a tenancy declaration suit, the burden lies on the claimant (tenant) to prove tenancy through rent receipts or agreements—not on the defendant—and that long possession alone cannot establish tenancy. Gaikwad produced no rent receipts, no tenancy agreement, and only salary/payment receipts (not signed by the landlord), while Bhimji's nokar-namas and salary records suggested Gaikwad was employed as a gardener, making the appellate court's reasoning perverse. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case