SAGAR & SALVI

The parties to this proceeding were Sagar and Salvi. The dispute concerned an application for an order for possession of a property. The application was heard by Burchardt J in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant, Sagar, was entitled to an order for possession of the property pursuant to section 72 of the *Residential Tenancies Act 1997* (Vic). This section permits a landlord to apply for possession where a tenant has failed to pay rent. The Court was required to determine if the conditions precedent for such an application had been met.

Burchardt J reasoned that section 72 of the *Residential Tenancies Act 1997* (Vic) requires a landlord to serve a notice to vacate on the tenant for non-payment of rent, and that the tenant must have failed to vacate the premises within the period specified in the notice. The Court found that the evidence presented by Sagar did not establish that a valid notice to vacate had been served on Salvi in accordance with the Act. Specifically, there was insufficient proof of service of the notice. Consequently, the preconditions for an order for possession under section 72 had not been satisfied.

The Court therefore dismissed the application for an order for possession.