In Brief
The appellant sought to enforce assignments of tenancy rights allegedly made to him during the pendency of the plaintiff's appeal in an underlying suit. The original decree favoured the plaintiff against the initial tenants. The appellant claimed that both the original tenant and the landlord had assigned their interests to him on the same day (24 January 2014). The Supreme Court held that the tenant's assignment violated Section 26 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Tenancy Act, 1999, which prohibits assignment absent a contract to the contrary. The landlord's subsequent agreement did not ratify this unlawful transfer because it made no reference to the tenant's assignment and the landlord lacked knowledge of it. Ratification requires conscious approval with full knowledge of the material facts. The Court also found the appellant's case internally contradictory regarding possession. The appeals were dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.