Mumbai Court Upholds 28-Year-Old Eviction Order for Tenant's Illegal Alterations
A 28-year-old property dispute in Mumbai has finally reached its conclusion as the appellate court upheld the 2019 eviction order against tenant Sharad Prabhakar Nileshwar for unauthorized alterations and commercial use of a residential flat.
Property DisputeEvictionTenantAlterationsCommercial UseReal Estate MumbaiAug 15, 2025
Mumbai: A 28-year-old property dispute, originally filed in 1997, has reached its conclusion after the appellate court upheld the 2019 eviction order passed by the trial court against tenant Sharad Prabhakar Nileshwar (62).
No landlord consent for changes
The Court of Small Causes at Mumbai (Bandra Branch) dismissed Nileshwar’s appeal, maintaining that he had carried out permanent alterations to the rented premises and changed its use without the landlord’s permission.
Permanent alterations without approval
“The judgment and decree passed by the learned trial court is legal, proper, and correct. Therefore, there is no need for interference,” observed the bench presided over by Additional Chief Judge A. A. Ayachit and Judge D. R. Mali.
In its 27-page judgment, the court noted that Nileshwar had failed to produce any evidence showing he had obtained written consent from landlord Rajesh Bhansali, owner of Bhansali Bhuvan, situated at North South Road No. 10, J.V.P. Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), to start a dental clinic or change the premises’ use.
Addressing the defense argument that the presence of the landlord’s father at the clinic’s inauguration in 1997 implied permission, the court stated, “Whether the presence of the plaintiff’s father at the time of the inaugural function of the clinic in 1997 can be construed as express or implied permission for change of user or as a waiver of legal rights under the tenancy agreement and law is a big question. For the reasons above, the answer, unequivocally, is in the negative. In case of change of user, even such change of user with the consent of the landlord is also not permissible.”
Citing the precedent Gopalkrishna Ganpat Gulve (deceased) & Anr. v. Shobhachand Raychand Firodiya, the court reiterated that premises let for a specific purpose must be used only for that purpose, and any deviation amounts to a breach of tenancy.
Breach of tenancy terms
The court held that Nileshwar had undertaken structural changes without consent, including breaking the wall between the WC and bathroom to create a single unit, converting the kitchen into a bedroom, using a passage as a kitchen, enclosing a balcony with brick masonry, and raising the ground level by 1–1½ feet.
On the issue of change of use, the court found that the premises—originally let for residential purposes—were used for commercial purposes as Nileshwar’s wife, Dr. Neena Sharad Nileshwar, operated a dental clinic there.
Eviction order upheld
“We come to the conclusion that the plaintiff has proved that the defendant has carried out additions and alterations of permanent nature without permission of the plaintiff and thereby caused waste and damage to the suit premises. The defendant has changed the user of the suit premises from residential to commercial and also committed a breach of the terms and conditions of the tenancy,” the court concluded, affirming the trial court’s decree of eviction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the main reason for the eviction order?
The main reason for the eviction order was that the tenant, Sharad Prabhakar Nileshwar, had carried out permanent alterations to the rented premises and changed its use from residential to commercial without the landlord's permission.
What specific alterations did the tenant make without the landlord's consent?
The tenant broke the wall between the WC and bathroom to create a single unit, converted the kitchen into a bedroom, used a passage as a kitchen, enclosed a balcony with brick masonry, and raised the ground level by 1–1½ feet.
How did the court address the defense argument about the landlord's father's presence at the clinic's inauguration?
The court stated that the presence of the landlord's father at the clinic's inauguration in 1997 could not be construed as express or implied permission for change of use or as a waiver of legal rights under the tenancy agreement.
What precedent did the court cite to support its decision?
The court cited the precedent Gopalkrishna Ganpat Gulve (deceased) & Anr. v. Shobhachand Raychand Firodiya, which states that premises let for a specific purpose must be used only for that purpose, and any deviation amounts to a breach of tenancy.
What was the final conclusion of the appellate court?
The appellate court concluded that the plaintiff (landlord) had proved that the defendant (tenant) had carried out additions and alterations of a permanent nature without permission, caused waste and damage to the premises, changed the user from residential to commercial, and committed a breach of the terms and conditions of the tenancy. The court affirmed the trial court’s decree of eviction.
Related News Articles
Mumbai's Sky-High Ambitions: Exploring the City's Love for Skyscrapers
As Mumbai continues to grow
Mumbai Records Third-Highest Surge in Luxury Housing Prices Globally
Mumbai's prime residential prices surge 11.5% year-on-year, ranking third globally, as India's economic growth drives demand in luxury housing market.
Affordable Housing Supply Dries Up as Builders Focus on Premium Projects
The latest data from JLL India reveals a 21% decline in affordable housing supply below Rs 50 lakh, while premium projects saw a significant surge in demand.
Priyanka Chopra's Real Estate Empire: A Peek into Her Investments
Priyanka Chopra Jonas is a keen investor in the real estate space, owning multiple properties in India and the US. Here's a look at her recent transactions.
Uber and Heads Up for Tails Expand Pet-Friendly Rides in Delhi and Mumbai
Uber has partnered with Heads Up for Tails to offer pet-friendly rides in Delhi and Mumbai, making travel more convenient and comfortable for pet owners.
Blackstone and Sattva-backed REIT Files Draft Papers for ₹7000 Cr IPO
A real estate investment trust (REIT) backed by asset manager Blackstone Group and Bengaluru developer Sattva Group has filed its draft papers with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for a ₹7000 crore initial public offering (IPO).