Mamujee v. Mala – sllr 1997 volume 2 page 277

The case between Mamujjee (plaintiff) and Mala (defendant) addressed the issue of whether premises described ambiguously as “Boutique and residence” should be considered business premises excepted from the Rent Act No. 7 of 1972 or remain classified as residential property under Section 48 of that Act. The court held that the burden of proof to establish that the premises were mainly used for business purposes rested on the plaintiff. The principle reaffirmed was that premises are subject to the Rent Act unless it is proven they are “excepted” as business premises. This decision relied on statutory interpretation of Section 48 and relevant judicial precedents, emphasizing that mere ambiguous description is insufficient and specific evidence of primary business use is required. The appeal w