https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293877 Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 was applied on the footing that the tenants were in arrears for more than six months, a valid demand notice had been served, and no statutory dispute was raised in time. The 1987 amendment did not operate retrospectively, and later deposits did not cure the default because the amended scheme also required payment of simple interest. Article 142 and Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act could not override the mandatory rent-control ground for eviction. The alleged garage occupier also failed to obtain protection under amended Section 15(2), as the evidence showed possession through an unauthorised arrangement and the finding of trespasser status was upheld. en-us Thu, 05 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Mar 2021 13:01:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293877 Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 was applied on the footing that the tenants were in arrears for more than six months, a valid demand notice had been served, and no statutory dispute was raised in time. The 1987 amendment did not operate retrospectively, and later deposits did not cure the default because the amended scheme also required payment of simple interest. Article 142 and Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act could not override the mandatory rent-control ground for eviction. The alleged garage occupier also failed to obtain protection under amended Section 15(2), as the evidence showed possession through an unauthorised arrangement and the finding of trespasser status was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293877