Deposit/Pagadi property of 1983

885 votes

Under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, the landlord cannot arbitrarily increase the rent for only one tenant unless there is a specific agreement or legal basis for it. Rent increases must be reasonable and based on permissible grounds, such as improvements or repairs to the property. In your case, a sudden hike from ₹102 to ₹3,500 without increasing rent for other tenants in similar situations could be considered unfair and challenged before the Rent Control Authority. Regarding the deposit (pagadi system), if you choose to vacate the property, the landlord is obligated to return the deposit amount. The rent deductions over time would also factor into the final settlement, but typically, the landlord must refund the balance of the deposit minus any legitimate deductions. A relevant case under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act is Dattatraya Krishna Jangam vs Jairam Ganesh Gore (1984 SCC OnLine Bom 211), where the Bombay High Court held that arbitrary rent hikes without valid reasons or agreement are not permissible. The court emphasized that rent increases must be justifiable under the provisions of the law. Additionally, in Ramji Savlaram Kadam vs. Vithalrao Govindrao Deshmukh (2003 (4) MhLJ 756), the court reaffirmed that a tenant paying rent under the deposit/pagadi system is entitled to a refund of the deposit after vacating the premises, minus any lawful deductions. The landlord cannot unilaterally alter rent terms without a legal basis.

Advocate Rohan Venkatesh Yemul LawRato