Disposed

Tomy Prothasis Nagpur and Others v. City of Nagpur Corpn.

Bombay HC9 Jan 2012WP/507/1995

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged nominal occupation charges and sought to fix reasonable rent. The Court directed the Deputy Commissioner to decide a representation on the matter after a hearing within three months and clarified that the licensee/tenant status is for independent consideration.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit a representation for fixing reasonable rent; Deputy Commissioner to decide it within three months after hearing; no action against petitioners pending.

Tomy Prothasis Nagpur and Others Vs City of Nagpur Corpn. — Consumer Protection | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

91wp507.95.odt 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

Writ Petition No. 507 of 1995

¶4

(Tomy Prothasis and Ors. vs. City of Nagpur Corporation, Nagpur) With

¶5

Writ Petition No.1321 of 1995 (Mohammed Jabir s/o. Abdul Jabbar .vs. City of Nagpur Corporation, Nagpur)

¶6

Office	Notes,	Office
Memoranda appearances,	of Court's	Coram, orders or	Court's or Judge's orders
directions	and	Registrar's
orders.

¶7

Coram : P. B. Majmudar and

¶8

A. P. Bhangale, JJ.

¶9

Date : 09/01/2012.

¶10

Heard Mr.A.S.Jaiswal, Adv. for the petitioners and Mr.C.S.Kaptan, Adv. for respondent.

¶11

By these petitions, the petitioners have challenged the decision of the respondent/Corporation in the matter of fixing of particular amount of rent towards occupation charges. It is the case of the Corporation that since the original license was given to the original allottees, from whom the petitioners have taken the rights, their possession was regularised by giving license in their favour on the basis of their undertaking that they will make payment of

¶12

91wp507.95.odt 2

¶13

rent at the rate prescribed under the Town Planning Act. The case of the petitioners is that they are tenants and therefore, they are not bound by the rates prescribed by the Town Planning department in the matter of rent. It is required to be noted that, as on today, the petitioners are paying rent @ Rs.3/- per sq. ft. which, according to the Corporation, is very nominal rent which is required to be enhanced with the change of time.

¶14

At the time of hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would like to make a representation by giving appropriate data in fixing appropriate amount of rent or the occupation charges of the premises concerned. The learned Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are willing to pay whatever reasonable rent is fixed by the Corporation.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners will make a representation in connection with fixing of appropriate rent/license fee of the premises in question and the Deputy Commissioner may be directed to decide the said representation in accordance with law and after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Council,

¶16

91wp507.95.odt 3

¶17

Nagpur is accordingly directed to decide the representation of the petitioners in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation, if so made by them.

¶18

It is clarified that whether the petitioners are licensee or tenants is a question which is to be considered by the Deputy Commissioner independently and that we have not expressed any opinion in this regard.

¶19

It is further clarified that, till decision is taken by the Deputy Commissioner, no steps be taken against the petitioners in respect of the premises in question.

¶20

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶21

In view of the above observations and directions, the petitions are disposed of. Rule is discharged.

¶22

J UDGE J UDGE

¶23

jais

Tomy Prothasis Nagpur and Others v. City of Nagpur Corpn.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tomy Prothasis Nagpur and Others v. City of Nagpur Corpn.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Keith De'Fugueiredo S/O Late Ep'Lham Vs Marie Colette Keith De'Fugueiredo

Shri Laxmi Cotton Traders Ltd. Vs State of Mah. and Another

Chandrani Devendraprasad Vs Govt.of Mah.,Higher Tech.Edn.andEMP.Deptt.and 3 Others

Dr. Ankush S/O Narayanrao Barmate Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Rahim Karnuji Meshram Vs the E.O,Zp,Bhandara and Others

Sunflames Petro Chemicals Pvt.Ltd.and Others Vs Union of India............