HVS PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED v VINOD EASHWAR

[2026] SGDC 33 District Court 21 January 2026 • DC/OC 262/2022 • 42 min read

10 cases cited (9 SG, 1 foreign)

Catchwords

Tort — Conspiracy Tort — Inducement of breach of contract Landlord and Tenant — Breach of contract Landlord and Tenant — Covenant for quiet enjoyment

Practice Areas

Tort Landlord and Tenant

Judges (1)

Georgina Lum Delivered

Counsel (6)

Mahmood Gaznavi Chambers LLC Firm Meritus Law LLC Firm Netto & Magin LLC Firm Hewage Ushan Saminda Premaratne Counsel Defendant Luke Netto Counsel Plaintiff Rezza Gaznavi Counsel Third Party

Parties (5)

HVS Properties Private Limited Plaintiff Mahmood Gaznavi s/o Bashir Muhammad Third Party Sunil Kishinchand Bhojwani Third Party Vinod Eashwar Defendant Win Phyu Shwe Third Party

Case Significance

[2026] SGDC 33 is a District Court decision dated 21 January 2026 concerning Landlord and Tenant and Tort, specifically addressing conspiracy, inducement of breach of contract, and breach of contract. The judgment was delivered by Georgina Lum. The case was brought by HVS Properties Private Limited (plaintiff) against Vinod Eashwar (defendant). Legal representation was provided by Netto & Magin LLC and Meritus Law LLC. The judgment cites 10 cases (9 Singapore, 1 foreign) and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Protection from Harassment Act.

Summary

A family company sued a tenant for breach of a tenancy agreement and unpaid rent for a Tanjong Rhu property, while the tenant counterclaimed for conspiracy, breach of quiet enjoyment, and inducement of breach of contract involving the company's directors and lawyer. The court dismissed both the claim and counterclaim, finding the company failed to prove its entitlement to the claimed rental and the tenant failed to establish the alleged conspiracy or interference.

What was decided in [2026] SGDC 33?

[2026] SGDC 33 (HVS PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED v VINOD EASHWAR) is a District Court decision from 21 January 2026 addressing Landlord and Tenant and Tort, specifically conspiracy, inducement of breach of contract, and breach of contract. The judgment was delivered by Georgina Lum.

Who were the parties in HVS PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED v VINOD EASHWAR?

The plaintiff in [2026] SGDC 33 was HVS Properties Private Limited, and the defendant was Vinod Eashwar. Legal representation included Mahmood Gaznavi Chambers LLC and Meritus Law LLC. The case was decided on 21 January 2026 in the District Court.

Which judge decided [2026] SGDC 33?

[2026] SGDC 33 was delivered by Georgina Lum in the District Court on 21 January 2026. The case concerned Landlord and Tenant and Tort.

What cases and statutes does [2026] SGDC 33 cite?

[2026] SGDC 33 cites 10 prior decisions, including 1 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Protection from Harassment Act.

Statutes Cited

Protection from Harassment Act (Cap 256A)

Cases Cited (10)

SG (2)

[2005] SGHC 162 [2025] SGHC 80

SLR (7)

[2008] 3 SLR(R) 1029 [2014] 1 SLR 860 [2015] 2 SLR 686 [2016] 1 SLR 1069 [2018] 1 SLR 170 [2018] 2 SLR 655 [2020] 2 SLR 386

UK (1)

[1963] 1 QB 499

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2026] SGDC 33)