Aditya Pancholi and his family will soon have to evict their bungalow in Juhu as the Bombay High Court rejected all the contentions raised by Pancholis to avoid the loss of their tenancy rights. They have had their claim rejected by three different courts that heard the case in three decades. Pancholis are likely to approach Supreme Court following the Bombay High Court ruling, reports Mumbai Mirror.
The Pancholis have rented the bungalow near ISKCON temple in Juhu since 1960 for Rs 150 a month. The suit was filed by Tarabai Hate, owner of the bungalow, in July 1977 under the Bombay Rents, Hotel, Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 upon Pancholi's failure to pay three months rent.
According to the report, the letters of communications between Aditya's father Rajan and the landlord, which stated 'arrears of rent would be remitted by money orders shortly' were submitted by Pancholis to the court, failed to stand in Small Causes court and went against the Pancholis on both counts.
In the battle of over three decades, the court found that Pancholi did not deposit the money or pay the landlord in other means.
“At least during the interim period [between 1977 when the notice was sent and 1979, when Rajan responded] Rajan Pancholi had remitted the arrears of rent, something could have been said with regards to the two letters cited by him. Besides, the two letters were not even referred to in the reply filed by Rajan Pancholi (in 1979). All this makes it clear that attempt on the part of Pancholis to introduce the two letters in the evidence was unsuccessful,“ the judge observed.
