WAMAN SHRINIWAS KINI versus RATILAL BHAGWANDAS & CO.

WAMAN SHRINIWAS KINI versus RATILAL BHAGWANDAS & CO.

A contract permitting sub-letting is void under Section 15 of the Bombay Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947, which prohibits sub-letting regardless of any agreement between landlord and tenant. The landlord's suit for eviction is not for enforcing an illegal agreement but is statutory enforcement of rights flowing from the tenant's infraction of Section 15. Waiver of statutory illegality is unenforceable and contrary to public policy.

Parties
Appellant: Waman Shriniwas Kini; Respondent: Ratilal Bhagwandas & Co.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 February 1959
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal by Special Leave / Final Supreme Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Ejectment, Sub Letting, Statutory Illegality, Waiver
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Ejectment Sub Letting Statutory Illegality Waiver

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waman Shriniwas Kini

Appellant

Ratilal Bhagwandas & Co.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal by Special Leave / Final Supreme Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statutory prohibition on sub-letting overrides contractual permissions to sub-let
  2. 2 Whether a landlord can obtain ejectment for statutory sub-letting despite consent to sub-letting in lease
  3. 3 Whether a waiver of statutory illegality is valid

Ratio Decidendi

A contract permitting sub-letting is void under Section 15 of the Bombay Hotel and Lodging Houses Rates Control Act, 1947, which prohibits sub-letting regardless of any agreement between landlord and tenant. The landlord's suit for eviction is not for enforcing an illegal agreement but is statutory enforcement of rights flowing from the tenant's infraction of Section 15. Waiver of statutory illegality is unenforceable and contrary to public policy.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs