Case Type

Commercial Holdover

Housing Type

Commercial

Court

Civil Court of the City of New York

County

Queens County (Queens)

L&T / Index / Case / Docket / Clerk's Number

LT-300756-25/QU

Petitioner

11114 101 Ave Corp.

Respondent

Mike Ramlogan, SIRI KRISHNA CAITANYA, MANDIR INC., & XYZ CORP.

Judge

Kagan, Mark

Decision/Order Date

2025-09-10

Posture

Other

Disposition

Other

Winner

Landlord Substantially Won

Synopsis

In this commercial holdover proceeding, the court denied the tenants' motion to reargue, affirming its prior decision that a summary proceeding can be brought against tenants at sufferance. The tenants argued that Article 7 of the RPAPL does not include tenants at sufferance as a class for which a summary proceeding is authorized, compelling the landlord to file an ejectment action in Supreme Court. The court rejected this, citing numerous precedents and reasoning that the language "recover possession" in RPL § 228 provides sufficient statutory basis for a summary proceeding in Housing Court.

Keywords

Commercial Holdover; Tenants at Sufferance; RPL § 228; Motion to Reargue Denied

Share

COinS