The Bombay High Court rejected a writ petition filed by licensees challenging an eviction order under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act. The petitioners offered to vacate upon receipt of payment for prior expenses, but the Court held no case exists to interfere with the Competent Authority’s finding.
Writ petition dismissed; no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
KVM
1/4
919 - WP 5070 OF 2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed KANCHAN by KANCHAN VINOD VINODMAYEKAR MAYEKAR Date: 2024.04.08 12:03:15 +0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5070 OF 2024
Lambe Munaf Rehman & Anr. ….. Petitioners
VERSUS
Suhail Asif Halai
….. Respondent
Ms.N.B.Bhavsar i/b/ V.K.Dubey Associates for the Petitioners.
Mr.J.K.Shah a/w. Mr.Govind Munde i/b. R.J.Law for the Respondent.
CORAM: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 4 APRIL, 2024
P.C. :-
This writ petition is filed by the licensees, who are the
respondents in the eviction proceedings filed by the licensor before the Competent Authority under section 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
2/4
KVM
919 - WP 5070 OF 2024.doc
Rent Control Act, by the licensor, thereby directing the licensees to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises i.e. Flat No. 1201 situated on 12th Floor of a building known as Dolphin Tower Co-operative Housing Society, Jankalyan Nagar, Malad (West), Mumbai - 400 095. Further the licensees were also directed to pay the damages at the rate of Rs.60,000/(Rs.30,000 x 2 ) from 1 October, 2022 till handing over the vacant possession of the suit premises.
3/4
KVM
919 - WP 5070 OF 2024.doc
(licensor) submits that he is not admitting this case put up by Ms.Bhavsar. He submits that such case of the licensees of having paid certain monies to the licensor has not been proved before the Competent Authority, neither any suit has been filed to that regard. He submits that the executing court has kept the matter for further orders on 13 May, 2024. He submits that the present writ petition in any case is not maintainable.
KVM
919 - WP 5070 OF 2024.doc
have not vacated the suit flat. Leave to defend filed by the licensees was rejected by the Competent Authority.
[RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Competent Authority’s order ejecting licensees who allege unproven payments in exchange for vacating the premises.
Whether a writ petition filed under Article 226 after more than half a year of the impugned order is maintainable.
Lambe Munaf Rehman & Anr.
Suhail Asif Halai
RAJESH S. PATIL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
