Bombay HC Rejects Guzdar House Tenants' Review Plea, Says Review Cannot Substitute An Appeal

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has dismissed a review petition filed by tenants of the historic Guzdar House building in south Mumbai, refusing to reopen an eviction order passed against them. The court held that the review jurisdiction cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal.

Justice NJ Jamadar rejected the plea filed by M/s Raghunath Bhagwandas and others, who sought a review of the court's August 2025 order upholding their eviction from premises in Guzdar House on Jagannath Shankar Seth Marg in Kalbadevi.

Counsel for the tenants, senior advocate Girish Godbole, had argued that they had recently discovered three assignment deeds executed in 1990, 1993 and 1995, which allegedly showed that the landlord firm, M/s Kishinchand Chellaram, was no longer the owner or landlord of the second-floor premises when it filed the eviction suit in 1994. They claimed these documents had been suppressed and sought recall of the eviction order or a fresh hearing.

The landlord’s advocate, Aniruddha Sapre, opposed the plea, contending that the newly cited documents did not affect its status as landlord. It argued that it had been the recognised sub-lessee of the premises for decades, had continuously managed the property, collected rent and created tenancies, and therefore remained entitled to seek eviction under the Bombay Rent Act.

Rejecting the review petition, the court reiterated that its power to review a judgment is “extremely limited” and cannot be invoked merely because a party has found a new argument or wishes to challenge the correctness of an earlier decision.

“A review is not an appeal in disguise,” Justice Jamadar observed while referring to settled legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court.

The court noted that the tenants had never disputed the landlord-tenant relationship during the original proceedings and had continued to pay rent to the respondent for several decades. It also held that the assignment deeds relied upon by the tenants were registered documents, meaning they were deemed to be within their knowledge through constructive notice.

The judge further held that the absence of any reference to the landlord's tenancy rights in one of the assignment deeds could not extinguish rights created under earlier registered sub-lease agreements.

“The sub-lease evidenced by the registered instruments in favour of Plaintiff No.1 cannot be extinguished by the mere absence of reference to such tenancy in the instrument to which Plaintiff No.1 was not a party,” the court said.

Holding that the tenants had failed to establish discovery of material evidence that would have changed the outcome of the case, the High Court dismissed the review petition.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/