Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hari Dhondu Gurav, was a monthly tenant in a room in Clement D'Souza Chawl, Mumbai, owned by the respondent, Jhonney Augustine Gomes. The respondent filed a suit for eviction on July 5, 1983, after the petitioner failed to pay rent from June 1, 1981, despite a notice of demand dated January 21, 1983. The trial court found the petitioner in arrears and passed a decree for possession. The appellate bench of the Small Causes Court confirmed this decision. The petitioner then filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court, arguing that the suit was not maintainable because the property was in a declared slum area and no permission from the competent authority under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act had been obtained. The High Court examined the provisions of the Slum Act and noted that while Section 22 requires permission for eviction suits in slum areas, the petitioner had not produced any evidence to show that the suit was filed without such permission. The court observed that the trial court had considered the issue and found that the suit was maintainable. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the concurrent findings of the courts below did not warrant interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. The court also noted that the petitioner had not paid rent for a long period and had not deposited arrears, and thus no interference was called for.
Headnote
A) Rent Control and Eviction - Jurisdiction of Small Causes Court - Slum Area Declaration - The issue was whether the Small Causes Court had jurisdiction to entertain an eviction suit when the property was in a declared slum area. The court held that the declaration of the area as a slum does not automatically oust the jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court; however, under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, prior permission of the competent authority is required for filing such a suit. In this case, the tenant failed to prove that the suit was filed without such permission, and the courts below correctly held the suit maintainable. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit for eviction filed by the landlord is maintainable without prior permission of the competent authority under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, when the suit premises are situated in a declared slum area.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the concurrent findings of the courts below and confirming the decree for eviction.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Small Causes Court not ousted by slum area declaration
- Permission of competent authority under Section 22 of Slum Act required for eviction suit
- Tenant's failure to pay rent despite notice justifies eviction
