Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, The Association of Recognized Agents, is a registered association of RTO agents who were allotted a room in the RTO Compound at Tulsiwadi, Tardeo, Mumbai, on a monthly rent of Rs.65/- under a lease agreement dated 18.6.1957. The Executive Engineer, Residency Division, Mumbai issued an eviction notice dated 14.3.1984 calling upon the petitioner to quit and deliver vacant possession by 30.4.1984. The petitioner filed S.C.Suit No.2872 of 1984 in the Bombay City Civil Court challenging the notice. Subsequently, the competent authority under the Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955 passed an order of eviction under Section 4 and a demand of arrears of rent of Rs.5,17,818/- under Section 5 of the said Act. The petitioner filed Misc.Appeal No.81 of 2012 before the Bombay City Civil Court against these orders, which was dismissed. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, upholding the impugned judgment and order.
Headnote
A) Eviction - Government Premises - Section 4 of Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955 - Competent Authority's Order - The petitioner, an association of recognized RTO agents, challenged an eviction notice dated 14.3.1984 and subsequent order of eviction and demand of arrears of rent of Rs.5,17,818/-. The Bombay City Civil Court dismissed the appeal. The High Court upheld the dismissal, finding no merit in the petition. (Paras 1-4)
B) Arrears of Rent - Section 5 of Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955 - Demand of Rs.5,17,818/- - The competent authority passed an order for arrears of rent which was challenged. The court found no error in the impugned judgment. (Para 1)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned judgment and order passed by the Bombay City Civil Court in Misc.Appeal No.81 of 2012 dismissing the petitioner's appeal against the eviction order and demand of arrears of rent under Sections 4 and 5 of the Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955 is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the impugned judgment and order of the Bombay City Civil Court.
Law Points
- Eviction under Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act
- 1955
- Sections 4 and 5
- Arrears of rent
- Competent authority's jurisdiction
- Appeal under Section 4 of the Act
- Scope of judicial review under Article 226
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (03) 43
WRIT PETITION NO. 9851 OF 2013
Mr.Yatin R.Shah for Petitioners, Mr.Jaydeep Deo AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4
The Association of Recognized Agents
The Chief Executive Engineer & ors
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 challenging the judgment and order of the Bombay City Civil Court dismissing the petitioner's appeal against eviction and demand of arrears of rent under the Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to quash the eviction order and demand of arrears of rent.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the eviction notice dated 14.3.1984 and subsequent orders of eviction and demand of arrears of rent.
Previous Decisions
The competent authority passed an order of eviction under Section 4 and demand of arrears of rent of Rs.5,17,818/- under Section 5 of the Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955. The Bombay City Civil Court dismissed Misc.Appeal No.81 of 2012 filed by the petitioner against these orders.
Issues
Whether the impugned judgment and order of the Bombay City Civil Court is sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
Mr.Yatin R.Shah for the petitioners argued in support of the petition.
Mr.Jaydeep Deo AGP for the respondents opposed the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no merit in the petition and upheld the eviction order and demand of arrears of rent under the Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955.
Judgment Excerpts
By these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner which is an association of recognized Agents of the Regional Transport Authority is challenging the Judgment and order passed by the learned Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court in Misc.Appeal No.81 of 2012.
The facts in nutshell are :
The petitioner is a registered Association formed by the Regional Transport Officers' (RTO) agents who were given permission to occupy a room in the RTO Compound, located at Tulsiwadi, Tardeo Mumbai.
The Executive Engineer, Residency Division, Mumbai issued a eviction notice dated 14.3.1984 inter alia stating that the petitioners were called upon to quit and deliver vacant possession of the said room admeasuring 300 sq.ft on expiration of one month and in any case on 30.4.1984 failing which proceedings to evict by adopting due process of law would be initiated.
Procedural History
The petitioner was allotted a room in 1957. An eviction notice was issued on 14.3.1984. The petitioner filed S.C.Suit No.2872 of 1984 in the Bombay City Civil Court. The competent authority passed an eviction order under Section 4 and demand of arrears under Section 5 of the Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955. The petitioner filed Misc.Appeal No.81 of 2012 which was dismissed. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition under Article 226.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Government Premises (Eviction) Act, 1955: Section 4, Section 5
- Constitution of India: Article 226
- Societies' Registration Act, 1860:
