Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor [2020] EWHC 2372 (QB) (04 September 2020)

Keshwala & Anor v Bhalsod & Anor [2020] EWHC 2372 (QB) (04 September 2020)

The refusal to grant relief from forfeiture was wrong in law because the delay by the claimants in applying for relief was within the statutory six-month period and did not constitute exceptional circumstances justifying refusal; the equitable discretion should have been exercised in favour of granting relief as the proviso for re-entry is security for rent, and all sums due were paid or tendered.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2372
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Navit Savadas Keshwala; Claimant/appellant: Kiran Mahesh Sharma; Defendant/respondent: Sharda Bhalsod; Defendant/respondent: Jayshree Bhalsod
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court Decision Refusing Relief From Forfeiture
Outcome
Appeal allowed; relief from forfeiture granted.
Legal Topics
Relief From Forfeiture, Leasehold, Equitable Discretion, Delay in Application, Re Entry for Non Payment of Rent
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Equity Relief From Forfeiture Leasehold Equitable Discretion Delay in Application Re Entry for Non Payment of Rent

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Navit Savadas Keshwala

Claimant/appellant

Kiran Mahesh Sharma

Claimant/appellant

Sharda Bhalsod

Defendant/respondent

Jayshree Bhalsod

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court Decision Refusing Relief From Forfeiture

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the County Court judge erred in refusing relief from forfeiture for non-payment of rent
  2. 2 Whether delay by the tenants in applying for relief within six months was sufficient to justify refusal
  3. 3 Whether both joint tenants needed to apply for relief and whether this was properly pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal to grant relief from forfeiture was wrong in law because the delay by the claimants in applying for relief was within the statutory six-month period and did not constitute exceptional circumstances justifying refusal; the equitable discretion should have been exercised in favour of granting relief as the proviso for re-entry is security for rent, and all sums due were paid or tendered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; relief from forfeiture granted.

Orders

  • Relief from forfeiture granted to claimants.
  • Appropriate provision to be made for terms of relief, including reversionary lease if necessary.