A landlord in Maharashtra can evict a protected tenant for personal use only by proving a reasonable and bona fide requirement under Section 16(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, and satisfying the comparative hardship test under Section 16(2). The claim fails where the landlord already has suitable alternative accommodation, or where eviction would cause the tenant greater hardship than refusal would cause the landlord. Courts must also weigh whether partial ev

How the 51% consent threshold under DCPR Regulation 33(7) works, when a cessed-building society's developer appointment can be challenged, and key precedent.

Can Mumbai's DP 2034 take your set-back land for road widening without paying? MRTP Act Sections 126 and 127, forced TDR, and Article 300A remedies explained.

Learn how Section 53(3) of the MRTP Act lets owners apply to compound unauthorised construction, its limits, fees, timelines, and effect on demolition notices.

The Court of Small Causes, Mumbai hears rent and tenancy disputes under two separate provisions: Section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882, which covers possession and rent claims between any landlord and tenant or licensor and licensee in Greater Mumbai, and Section 33 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, which gives it exclusive jurisdiction wherever that Act applies. Pure title disputes and claims unconnected to the tenancy or licence fall outside bot

How BMC decides whether an unauthorised mezzanine, loft or balcony enclosure attracts a Section 351 or Section 354-A notice under the MMC Act, 1888.

Section 347 bars unsanctioned construction; Section 351 is the enforcement notice. Learn why BMC sometimes conflates the two and what it means for owners.

An explanation of who qualifies as a protected or statutory tenant under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, and the eviction, rent, and succession protections that status carries.

How to challenge a BMC C-1 dangerous-building classification before the Technical Advisory Committee under Sections 353B and 354 of the MMC Act.

Standard rent under Section 7(14) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 equals a rent already fixed by a court, or the rent payable on 1 October 1987, in either case increased by 5 per cent. Older tenancies instead anchor to the rent payable on 1 September 1940 under the earlier Bombay Rent Act. The figure differs sharply from market rent and fixes how much a landlord can lawfully recover through eviction proceedings before the Court of Small Causes. This article sets out

An appeal from a decree of the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai in a rent or eviction dispute lies under Section 34 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, not to the District Court, but to an Appellate Bench of two judges of the same court, excluding the deciding judge, within thirty days. Outside Mumbai, the appeal goes to the District Court instead. Section 34(3) bars any further appeal against the Appellate Bench's decision, though the Bombay High Court retains a narrow s

A step-by-step guide to filing a landlord eviction suit in the Small Causes Court, Mumbai: grounds, court fees, service, trial, and executing the decree.

An old, cessed building in South Mumbai and a cluster of ageing structures spread across an entire layout in the suburbs both qualify, in principle, for redevelopment under Mumbai's planning regulations, but they do not qualify under the same regulation, and the choice between them carries very different consequences for FSI, consent thresholds, and who ultimately controls the project. Regulation 33(7) and Regulation 33(9) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations

Regulation 33(5) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 2034 governs redevelopment of MHADA's own housing colonies, where occupants hold an ownership interest, while Regulation 33(24) governs redevelopment of tenanted buildings whose occupants hold tenancy rights rather than ownership. These tenanted buildings were either built by the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority under a slum clearance scheme or are owned outright by the

How a Section 351 show-cause notice differs from a Section 354-A stop-work notice under the MMC Act, and what Mumbai property owners should do on receipt of either.

Section 55 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 makes registration of leave and license agreements compulsory in Mumbai, placing the duty and penal risk on the landlord.

There is no separate Charity Commissioner NOC under Maharashtra law; what practitioners call by that name is the sanction granted under Section 36 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, the statutory permission a public trust must obtain before it can sell, mortgage, exchange, gift, or grant a long lease of its immovable property. Section 36A imposes a parallel requirement for mortgages and borrowing. This article explains how that sanction is obtained, what documentatio

BMC can delay or refuse an Occupation Certificate even after construction is complete. Learn Section 353A timelines, key precedent, and available remedies.

Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) are investment vehicles that allow retail and institutional investors to invest in income-generating commercial real estate without directly owning property. They

A landlord in Mumbai may recover possession from a tenant for non-payment of rent only by filing a suit before the Court of Small Causes, Bombay under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, after serving a written notice of demand and waiting ninety days for the tenant to cure the default. Self-help remedies, changing locks or cutting off utilities, carry no legal effect regardless of how much rent is owed. The tenant retains a further statutory chance to stop