Mumbai Court Rules Against Senior Citizen in Landmark Airbnb Dispute
A cooperative court in Mumbai has delivered a significant verdict, dismissing a long-standing dispute filed by a 76-year-old chartered accountant against his Churchgate housing society. The society had refused to allow him to host Indian and foreign guests through Airbnb in his spacious four-bedroom flat, sparking a legal battle that began in 2014.
Retiree's Plea for Livelihood and Companionship
Mahesh Mehta, the petitioner, moved the court arguing that as a retiree with children settled abroad, hosting guests served dual purposes: providing a livelihood and combating loneliness. He contended that "paying guest keeping is legal, noncommercial and doesn't require any approval or licence." However, the court firmly rejected this claim, drawing a clear distinction between traditional long-term paying guest arrangements and short-term Airbnb-style hosting.
Judge S V Mehta-Patil delivered the ruling, stating: "There appears no difference in the activity of hotel and keeping paying guests through Airbnb. And this activity will definitely fall under the commercial category." The judge emphasized that Mehta's approach—displaying rooms as deluxe, luxury, or economy, applying cancellation policies, and charging for additional services like pickup and drop—mirrored hotel operations rather than casual hosting.
Court Acknowledges Senior Citizen Plight But Upholds Society Rules
While recognizing the "sad state of affairs" faced by many senior citizens in India whose children move abroad, leaving them without emotional, economic, or physical support, the court maintained that permitting such activities without society approval would create disorder. The judgment stated that allowing parents to keep paying guests on grounds of loneliness would weaken the fundamental concept of a cooperative housing society.
"The society is not opposing the disputant to keep the paying guest," clarified Judge Mehta-Patil. "The only fact is that they are restricting short and non-temporary period paying guests. By keeping paying guests for a duration of 11 months also, the disputant can solve their problem of loneliness. Hence, the ground of loneliness and livelihood pleaded by the disputant is of no use."
Homestay Scheme Arguments Fail to Convince Court
The court also examined Mehta's reliance on the Ministry of Tourism's homestay scheme. He argued that his activity fell under the Government of India's bed-and-breakfast and homestay framework, designed to offer tourists standardized stays within Indian family environments. Mehta claimed to have applied for registration under the Incredible India Bed and Breakfast/Homestay Establishment scheme.
However, the judge found critical flaws in this argument. Mehta failed to produce a licence showing renewal of permission from the Department of Tourism to continue the activity. He admitted that since 2018, he had not obtained any licence from government authorities permitting him to carry on the hosting business.
Background of the Legal Conflict
The dispute originated when Mehta, a resident of Bharatiya Friend's housing society in Churchgate, challenged general body resolutions that explicitly barred commercial activities within the society. These resolutions imposed substantial penalties of up to Rs 3,000 per day for hosting unauthorized guests, reflecting the society's strict stance against commercial use of residential premises.
The court accepted arguments presented by the society's lawyer, Rashi Sheth, reinforcing the society's right to enforce rules that maintain the residential character of the cooperative housing community. This ruling sets a precedent for similar disputes across Mumbai's numerous housing societies grappling with the rise of short-term rental platforms.
