Mumbai HC: Tenant's 210-Day Delay in Rent Payment Leads to Eviction

Quick Summary: In a recent case from Mumbai, the High Court dismissed a tenant's appeal for missing an important deadline to pay overdue rent. The court's decision was influenced by the tenant's failure to follow the rules set by the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.

The Background: Who's Who?

In this case, Sushilaben Harilal Joshi (now deceased) was represented by Jyoti Harsukhrai Joshi and others. They were up against Triveniben Bhikhalal Busa and others. The judgment was delivered by Judge Madhav J. Jamdar on December 2, 2025, in Mumbai.

The Initial Ruling: Rent Payment Issues

The whole issue started with a decision from November 4, 2025, by the Small Causes Court in Mumbai. The court had ruled against Triveniben Bhikhalal Busa and others for not paying rent on time. This decision was based on an earlier ruling from October 25, 2013.

Rent Control Act: The 90-Day Rule

The Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, was very important in this case. A notice demanding payment was sent on February 14, 2007, and received by February 22, 2007. The tenants had to pay the overdue rent within 90 days after receiving the court notice, which they failed to do.

"No order to evict shall be passed...if, within a period of ninety days from the date of service of the summons of the suit, the tenant pays or tenders in court the standard rent..."

Missed Deadlines: The Core Problem

The notice was served on August 4, 2007, but Triveniben Bhikhalal Busa and others didn't file the needed paperwork to pay the overdue rent until March 10, 2008—about 210 days later. This delay was way past the 90-day requirement.

Legal Arguments: No Room for Delay

Mr. Jaydeep Deo, representing Triveniben Bhikhalal Busa and others, admitted there was no legal way to extend the 90-day deadline. Both the trial and higher courts agreed that the tenants failed to pay the rent on time.

Final Decision: No Changes

Judge Jamdar dismissed the appeal, stating that Triveniben Bhikhalal Busa and others didn't provide a strong enough reason to change the previous decisions. The request to pause the eviction was also denied since the property hadn't been used by the tenants for six years.

In short, the court upheld the decision to evict the tenants for missing the deadline to pay overdue rent.