Lutchmee Narain Dhunnoo (Respondent) v Shyam Kumar Cheekooree (Appellant) (Mauritius)

Hearing listed

Case summary
Appeal

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2023/0089

Jurisdiction

Mauritius

Parties

Appellant(s)

Shyam Kumar Cheekooree

Respondent(s)

Lutchmee Narain Dhunnoo

Issue

Did the Supreme Court of Mauritius err in concluding that the appellant’s grounds of appeal were not on points of law? Did the Fair Rent Tribunal err in accepting the evidence of the respondent’s valuer’s evidence? Did the Fair Rent Tribunal err by taking into account evidence of rental values from 2017?

Facts

The appellant is the tenant of commercial premises. The respondent is the landlord of those premises. On 1 July 2013, the respondent lodged an application before the Fair Rent Tribunal for a determination of the market rent for the premises. Relying on three comparator properties (referred to as ‘Le Superbe’, ‘All Sports’, and ‘Amryz’), the appellant’s valuer concluded that a monthly rent of 13,000 rupees reflected the current market value of the premises. By contrast, relying upon four comparator properties (referred to as ‘Future Shop’, ‘Kestrel Digital’, ‘Amryz’, and ‘Burgeon’) the respondent’s valuer recommended a market rent of 43,000 rupees per month. It its judgment of 18 August 2018, the Tribunal fixed the market rent for the premises at 38,414 rupees per month. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Mauritius (Appellate Jurisdiction), which rejected the appeal on 26 July 2022. The appellant now appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.