https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200443 Section 12 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 only provides tenant protection where the statutory conditions are met; it does not oust the court's jurisdiction to try an ejectment suit. The District Court was competent to decide whether the tenant had shown readiness and willingness to pay standard rent and permitted increases, and an error in that determination did not amount to jurisdictional error under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Supreme Court held that the High Court could not revise and set aside the District Court's decree on that basis, so the revisional interference was unwarranted. en-us Tue, 22 Oct 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:36:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200443 Section 12 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 only provides tenant protection where the statutory conditions are met; it does not oust the court's jurisdiction to try an ejectment suit. The District Court was competent to decide whether the tenant had shown readiness and willingness to pay standard rent and permitted increases, and an error in that determination did not amount to jurisdictional error under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Supreme Court held that the High Court could not revise and set aside the District Court's decree on that basis, so the revisional interference was unwarranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 22 Oct 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200443