Vishwanath Govind Lagu vs Smt. Usha Laxman Barve on 11 August, 2005
In J. Marathe v. P.V. Kaloke 2004 (6) Bom.C.R. 721, a Division bench of the Bombay High Court held as under:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.38 seconds)Munawar Abdul Kadar Baig vs Smt. Jainabai Najamuddin(Deleted) And ... on 10 March, 2026
36. So far as the case of Defendants-Tenants that flat in Qutbi
Manzil is acquired by Salim - other son of Defendant No. 1 -Tenant
and his father's name is joined out of respect, the same cannot be
held as sufficient to escape from the clutches of acquisition of other
Shailaja 19
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 11/03/2026 20:37:12 :::
CRA-17-2014 (J) C4.doc
suitable residence because, admittedly the suit-flat is purchased in
joint name of tenant's husband. Defendant No.1 can certainly be
stated to have enforceable right of residence in the flat of her
husband. It is nobody's case that Defendant No.1 and her husband
were having strained relations or there was any dispute pending in
that regard. The judgment relied on by the Appellate Court in the
case of J. Marathe (deceased) and others versus P. V. Kaloke [2004
(6) Bom. C.R. 721] itself clarifies that ultimately whether the
premises in 'another town' can be considered as 'suitable alternate
residence' would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case
and, therefore, decree can be passed on the ground of section 13 (1)
Mohan Vishwanath Mulay vs Shamrao Raghunathrao Karyakarte on 4 March, 2011
In J. Marathe (Deceased) v. P.V. Kaloke, 2004 (4) ALL MR
468, a Division Bench of this Court hearing a reference has
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:02:27 :::
5 WP 2120/1995
considered whether acquisition of residential premises by a
tenant in a different town can per se be considered as an
acquisition of suitable residential premises within the meaning
of section 13(1)(l) of the Bombay Rent Act.
1