Synopsis

The original tenant (applicant) filed a civil revision application under Section 115 of the CPC challenging an appellate decree of eviction passed against him. During the pendency of the revision, the tenant purchased a 50% share in the suit building from the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff No.2 (one of the two co‑owner landlords). Consequently, the tenant became a part‑owner of the property while continuing as a tenant of the remaining share. The original plaintiff No.1 (the other co‑owner) expressed that he no longer wished to continue the eviction proceedings. The Bombay High Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Mohinder Prasad Jain v. Manohar Lal Jain (2006) 2 SCC 724, held that once a tenant becomes a co‑owner, eviction proceedings cannot be continued against him. The court also directed refund of the amount deposited by the tenant (as market rent during pendency) with accrued interest, as per the Supreme Court’s order that the deposits would be subject to the final outcome of the revision.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Coram: Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Date of Judgment: 7th April 2026

Citation: Civil Revision Application No. 752/2014

Core Law: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Section 115); Rent Control Laws; Law of Co‑ownership and Tenancy

2. Legal Framework

Major laws and provisions involved

• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 115 (revisional jurisdiction of High Court)

• Rent Control Act (specific Act not named, but eviction suit under Rent Act)

• Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – principles of co‑ownership and sale of share

Key legal principles applied

• Suit by one co‑owner maintainable: A co‑owner can file an eviction suit on behalf of all co‑owners, based on the doctrine of agency. Consent of other co‑owners is presumed unless they object.

• Effect of subsequent objection by a co‑owner: If during the pendency of the eviction proceedings, a co‑owner objects to continuing the suit, the eviction proceedings cannot be continued. This principle applies even if the co‑owner sells his share to the tenant.

• Tenant purchasing co‑owner’s share: When a tenant purchases a share of the tenanted premises from one of the co‑owners, he becomes a co‑owner. In such a case, the eviction proceedings cannot be proceeded against him because he is now both a tenant (of the remaining share) and a co‑owner. The other co‑owner cannot seek eviction of a person who is also a co‑owner.

• Dual capacity of tenant‑cum‑co‑owner: The tenant’s right in the property enhances from tenancy to ownership to the extent of the share purchased. The other co‑owner cannot evict him.

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.