Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Joel Avelino Noronha and Assuncao Teodosio Serafino Fernandes, challenged an order dated 15/07/2015 passed by the Principal District Judge, South Goa. The respondents, Francisco Xavier Estanislaus Miranda and others, claimed that petitioner no.2 was their tenant and petitioner no.1 was inducted as a subtenant without permission. They initiated eviction proceedings against both petitioners. During the pendency of Rent Appeal No.35/2013, the respondents filed an application under Section 32(4) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968. The Principal District Judge allowed the application, directing that the proceedings be stopped and the petitioners put the respondents in possession of the suit premises. The petitioners contended that this order was passed without hearing them, violating principles of natural justice. The High Court held that Section 32(4) does not empower the court to pass such an order without hearing the affected parties. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the Principal District Judge to hear the application afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Section 32(4) - Eviction Proceedings - Natural Justice - The Principal District Judge passed an order under Section 32(4) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 directing stoppage of Rent Appeal No.35/2013 and putting respondents in possession of suit premises without hearing the petitioners. Held that such an order cannot be passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties likely to be affected, as it violates principles of natural justice. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Principal District Judge could pass an order under Section 32(4) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 directing stoppage of proceedings and putting respondents in possession without hearing the petitioners.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 15/07/2015, and directed the Principal District Judge to hear the application under Section 32(4) afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Section 32(4) of Goa
- Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease
- Rent and Eviction) Control Act
- 1968
- natural justice
- right to be heard
- eviction proceedings
- sub-tenancy
Case Details
WRIT PETITION NO.793 of 2015
Mr. Nigel da Costa Frias for petitioners; Mr. R. G. Ramani with Mr. Ulhas Raikar for respondents
Shri Joel Avelino Noronha and Shri Assuncao Teodosio Serafino Fernandes
Shri Francisco Xavier Estanislaus Miranda, Shri Recardo Lucio Fernando Miranda, and Shri Denzil Frederico Miranda
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging an order under Section 32(4) of the Rent Act directing stoppage of eviction proceedings and possession.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of the order dated 15/07/2015 passed by Principal District Judge, South Goa.
Filing Reason
The order was passed without hearing the petitioners, violating principles of natural justice.
Previous Decisions
Principal District Judge allowed application under Section 32(4) directing stoppage of Rent Appeal No.35/2013 and putting respondents in possession.
Issues
Whether the order under Section 32(4) of the Rent Act could be passed without hearing the petitioners.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the impugned order was passed without giving them an opportunity of hearing, violating natural justice.
Respondents contended that the order was justified under Section 32(4).
Ratio Decidendi
An order under Section 32(4) of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 directing stoppage of proceedings and putting the opposite party in possession cannot be passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties likely to be affected, as it violates principles of natural justice.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition, the petitioners have challenged legality and correctness of the order dated 15/07/2015 passed by Principal District Judge, South Goa, whereby, by invoking power under Section 32(4) of Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968, the proceedings of Rent Appeal No.35/2013 have been directed to be stopped with a further direction to the petitioners to put the respondents in possession of the suit premises.
Procedural History
Respondents filed eviction proceedings against petitioners. During pendency of Rent Appeal No.35/2013, respondents filed application under Section 32(4). Principal District Judge allowed application on 15/07/2015. Petitioners challenged this order by way of writ petition before High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968: Section 32(4)
