She only qualifies to be a tenant you can appeal against the order

Once a tenant always a tenant 

2) tenant is not part owner of property 

3) if court has passed eviction order tenant has to vacate premises unless stay order is passed by appellate court 

It is necessary to peruse order  passed by small causes court to advice 

you have not mentioned grounds on which court passed eviction order 

Yes there are some grounds for eviction not paying rent, bonafide user, subletting, non user etc only on that grounds he can evuc

- Under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, upon the death of a pagdi tenant, the tenancy rights are transferred to the legal heir/s who were living in the flat when the tenant died.

- If your father-in-law was a tenant there , then after his demise your mother-in-law having her right to reside into the same. 

- However, if he occupied the said apartment on the agreement which you have mentioned , then in the absence of a registered agreement , the landlord has right to evict. 

- Hence, you can approach the Higher court against that order of eviction. 

Your mother-in-law retains strong tenancy protection and equitable rights under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The eviction decree appears contestable, especially given the long history of litigation, consistent rent deposit, and absence of clear ownership documents from the petitioner.

If the tenancy is is pagdi tenancy, then the pagdi property is governed by Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, under this, the tenant has protected tenancy rights.  No doubt residing in the property for a period of 50 years or more cannot be considered as ownership but the tenancy rights and succession rights are protected. 

As per section 7(15)(d) of the MRC Act the tenancy rights automatically passes from your father in law to his spouse, i.e., your mother in law who was residing with him at the time of his death. Therefore your mother in law becomes a lawful tenant. 

The payment of 65% of sale amount cannot be considered as sale in the absence of registered sale deed or a sale agreement too. In fact any claim based on the so called payment is actually barred by limitation at this stage.

As you say that the current owner failed to produce the title deed before court, you can file an appeal and dispute the locus standi of the petitioner. 

Your mother in law's super senior age cannot of course confer title to the property for any reason, however considering her age factor the appellate court may take a lenient view on humanitarian grounds and may also stay the execution petition to execute the decree. Therefore you may file an appeal before the appellate court immediately. 

You can even consider the compromise as pect to settle the matter amicably instead of stretching the litigation endlessly,

The landlord cannot evict the tenant except on limited statutory grounds like bonafide requirement or no payment  or unauthorised alterations etc. 

Long time residence say 50 years cannot confer title to the tenant but it will establish the tenancy rights  

As per section 7(15)(d) of the MRC Act the tenancy rights automatically passes from your father in law to his spouse, i.e., your mother in law who was residing with him at the time of his death. Therefore your mother in law becomes a lawful tenant. 

As you say that the current owner failed to produce the title deed before court, you can file an appeal and dispute the locus standi of the petitioner. 

Dear Client,

In your mother-in-law’s case, her long-term tenancy of over 50 years under the Pagdi system offers her certain statutory protections under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Even though the recent court order directs her to vacate, she can appeal the decision before the appellate court citing: (1) her protected tenant status, as Pagdi tenants cannot be evicted except on specific grounds such as non-payment or bona fide landlord requirement; (2) the part-performance doctrine under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, since your late father-in-law paid 65% of the agreed sale amount and continued possession with the landlord’s consent, creating an equitable interest; and (3) her age and long possession as humanitarian and equitable grounds under Article 21 (right to life and shelter). The petitioner’s inability to produce the original ownership or sale agreement also weakens his claim. During the appeal, you can seek a stay on eviction until the ownership and tenant rights are conclusively determined. Courts often show leniency to senior citizens with long possession when eviction would cause hardship. I hope this answer helps. For any more queries, do not hesitate to contact us.

Your mother-in-law has strong grounds to appeal.

Under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, a tenant can be evicted only for limited reasons; non-payment, subletting, or landlord’s bona fide need. Since rent was regularly deposited in court, eviction on these grounds is invalid.

Her 50+ years of lawful occupation gives her protected tenancy and quasi-ownership rights under the Pagdi system. The petitioner’s failure to produce the original ownership document further weakens his case.

Also, the part-paid sale agreement creates an equitable right under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.
Thus, you can appeal and seek a stay, as the eviction order is legally challengeable.

You have informed that your late father-in-law was a tenant of a residential premises in Mumbai held on Pagdi (rent-control) basis for more than five decades. During his lifetime, there existed an understanding or agreement with the then landlord that the property would be sold to him for ₹28,000, out of which approximately 65% of the amount was paid. However, the sale was never completed and the title deed was not transferred. Your mother-in-law, now aged about 85 years, continues to reside in the premises and has been regularly paying rent, which has been deposited in court during the pendency of litigation. Recently, a Small Causes Court has passed an order directing her to vacate the premises within two months. You propose to file an appeal and seek clarification as to whether she retains any legal rights or entitlement to the premises under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (“MRCA”), given her long occupation and the partial payment under the earlier agreement.

Under Maharashtra law, Pagdi or tenancy premises are governed primarily by the MRCA. A tenant or lawful sub-tenant, and after his death, his spouse, son, daughter, and certain family members residing with him, acquire statutory tenancy rights that continue even after the original contractual tenancy has expired or been terminated. Section 7(15) of the MRCA defines a “tenant” to include not only the person who entered into tenancy but also such members of his family residing with him at the time of his death. Hence, upon the death of your father-in-law, your mother-in-law became a deemed tenant in her own right.

The MRCA strictly limits the grounds on which a landlord may evict a tenant. These are listed in Section 16 of the Act. The principal grounds include: (i) default in rent payment for six months or more; (ii) sub-letting or assignment without permission; (iii) bona fide requirement of landlord; (iv) erection of permanent structure without consent; (v) causing nuisance, damage, or change of user; and a few other exceptional cases. Mere passage of time, change of ownership, or the landlord’s wish to develop the property are not sufficient grounds for eviction unless covered by these statutory reasons and supported by evidence.

Since you have mentioned that rent was regularly deposited in court during litigation, your mother-in-law cannot be treated as a defaulter. Long-term residence and age are additional equitable factors that strengthen her claim to protection under the MRCA. The courts in Mumbai have consistently held that an old tenant cannot be evicted unless the landlord strictly proves one of the statutory grounds. The burden of proof lies entirely on the landlord.

The alleged agreement to sell the property for ₹28,000, though incomplete, is relevant for equitable consideration. Since part payment was made and possession continued, your father-in-law effectively held the premises both as a statutory tenant and as a person in possession under a failed agreement to sell. While an uncompleted sale does not transfer ownership under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, courts sometimes treat such possession as protected possession under Section 53A (doctrine of part performance), provided the original agreement can be proved. However, if the original agreement is unavailable or has not been produced by the new petitioner claiming ownership, this weakens his title and strengthens your defence that your family’s possession was lawful and continuous under the tenancy.

Even if the court order now directs eviction, your mother-in-law has a strong ground to appeal under Section 34 of the MRCA read with the provisions of the Presidency Small Causes Courts Act. The appeal should be filed before the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court, Mumbai within 30 days from the date of judgment. The appeal will automatically stay the eviction order if you file a stay petition along with it. Courts in such matters usually grant a stay, especially where the tenant is a senior citizen and there is a long history of occupation.

Regarding the concept that “the tenant is also a part owner,” the law does not treat a tenant as an owner in title; however, under Pagdi tenancy, the tenant holds heritable and transferable tenancy rights, which have a substantial market value and are often referred to as “quasi-ownership.” These rights can be sold, bequeathed, or transferred with the landlord’s consent, and in redevelopment projects, tenants are often entitled to ownership of new flats without cost. Therefore, while your mother-in-law is not a legal owner in the strict sense, she possesses valuable statutory tenancy rights that are recognised as immovable property rights for all practical purposes.

In your appeal, you should emphasise the following legal points:

1. Your mother-in-law is a protected tenant under Section 7(15) read with Section 16 of the MRCA, having been in continuous lawful occupation for over five decades.

2. Rent has been regularly paid or deposited in court, so there is no default.

3. The alleged landlord has failed to establish ownership and to produce the original sale deed or chain of title.

4. The earlier payment of 65% under the unfulfilled sale agreement, and the landlord’s permission to continue occupation, constitute strong equitable grounds against eviction.

5. At 85 years of age, she is entitled to humanitarian and equitable consideration, and eviction would cause irreparable hardship.

Your advocate may also request the appellate court to exercise powers under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC to stay execution of the eviction decree until the final disposal of the appeal.

If the appellate bench upholds the eviction and there is still merit in the legal grounds, a further revision or writ petition can be filed before the Bombay High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. Courts have often intervened in such cases where long-standing tenants were evicted without strict compliance with statutory conditions (see Vasant Pratap Pandit v. Dr. Anant Trimbak Sabnis, AIR 1994 SC 716; Gajanan Dattatraya v. Sherbanu Hosang Patel, 1975 AIR 2156).

As for the cost and time frame, filing the appeal will require certified copies of the judgment and proceedings (2–3 weeks), preparation of memorandum of appeal, and court fees (approximately ₹2,000 to ₹3,000). Advocate’s fees for such appellate work generally range from ₹25,000 to ₹75,000 depending on the seniority of counsel and complexity. The appeal process may take 6 to 12 months for hearing, but interim stay can usually be obtained within the first few weeks.

In conclusion, your mother-in-law continues to hold strong statutory protection as a deemed tenant under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. Eviction can be challenged successfully if the landlord has not strictly proved statutory grounds or title. The long duration of tenancy, regular rent payment, her advanced age, and the landlord’s inability to produce original ownership documents are significant factors that favour her defence. The recommended course is to immediately file an appeal before the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court with an urgent stay application, ensuring she is not dispossessed pending final adjudication.