Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner (original Defendant) challenged the concurrent decrees of eviction passed by the Trial Court and the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court, Bombay, in a suit for recovery of possession filed by the Respondent (original Plaintiff). The Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant was a licensee under a Leave and License Agreement dated 1 March 1972 for a period of 11 months, which expired on 31 January 1973. The Defendant failed to vacate and also defaulted in payment of license fees. The Defendant contended that he had become a protected tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, as he was in occupation on 1 February 1973. The Trial Court decreed the suit on 17 August 1990, holding that the license had expired and the Defendant was not a licensee on the crucial date. The Appellate Bench dismissed the appeal on 5 July 1996. The High Court, in the present writ petition, examined the applicability of Section 15A. It noted that the license expired on 31 January 1973 and was not renewed. Therefore, on 1 February 1973, the Defendant was not in occupation as a licensee but as a trespasser. The Court held that Section 15A requires a valid and subsisting license on 1 February 1973, which was absent. Consequently, the Defendant could not claim deemed tenancy. The Court also noted that the Plaintiff had already secured possession of the suit premises during the pendency of the petition. Finding no error in the concurrent findings, the High Court dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Protected Tenancy - Section 15A Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Licensee's Status - The issue was whether a licensee whose license expired on 31 January 1973 and who continued in possession without renewal could claim deemed tenancy under Section 15A. The Court held that for claiming status of tenant under Section 15A, it is necessary that the person is in occupation as a licensee on 1 February 1973. Since the license expired on 31 January 1973 and was not renewed, the Defendant was not a licensee on the crucial date and thus not entitled to protection. (Paras 7-8)
B) Civil Procedure - Writ Jurisdiction - Interference with Concurrent Findings - The Court declined to interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and Appellate Bench, as no patent error or perversity was shown. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Defendant, who remained in possession after expiry of the license on 31 January 1973, is entitled to the status of a protected tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the concurrent decrees of eviction passed by the Trial Court and the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court.
Law Points
- Section 15A of Bombay Rent Act requires valid and subsisting license on 1 February 1973
- Licensee remaining in possession after expiry of license not covered
- Concurrent findings not interfered in writ jurisdiction
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (9) 276
WRIT PETITION NO.5177 OF 1996
Mr. N.V. Vechalekar for the Petitioner, Mr. A.K. Singh with Mr. Piyush Singh i/b. M/s. Singh Associates for Respondent
Chogalal Santokhji Raval (since deceased, through legal heirs)
Sjamkarprasad Jagnath Varma
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging concurrent decrees of eviction passed by the Small Causes Court and its Appellate Bench in a suit for recovery of possession based on expiry of leave and license agreement.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner (original Defendant) sought setting aside of the eviction decree and dismissal of the suit.
Filing Reason
The Petitioner claimed that he had become a protected tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act and that the Plaintiff had no locus standi to seek eviction.
Previous Decisions
The Trial Court decreed the suit on 17 August 1990, directing the Defendant to hand over possession. The Appellate Bench dismissed the appeal on 5 July 1996, confirming the decree.
Issues
Whether the Defendant, whose license expired on 31 January 1973, is entitled to the status of a protected tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947.
Whether the suit filed by the Plaintiff under Section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act was maintainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Defendant was a licensee on 1 February 1973 and thus became a protected tenant under Section 15A; the Plaintiff had no locus as the land belonged to Indian Railways and the Plaintiff's own tenancy was terminated.
Respondent argued that the license expired before 1 February 1973 and was not renewed, so Section 15A did not apply; concurrent findings should not be interfered with.
Ratio Decidendi
For claiming the status of a deemed tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, the person must be in occupation as a licensee on 1 February 1973 under a valid and subsisting license. Since the license in this case expired on 31 January 1973 and was not renewed, the Defendant was not a licensee on the crucial date and therefore not entitled to protection under Section 15A.
Judgment Excerpts
Thus, for claiming status of tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act, it is necessary that the person is in occupation as a licensee on 1 February 1973.
Since the license expired on 31 January 1973 and was not renewed, the Defendant was not a licensee on the crucial date and thus not entitled to protection.
Procedural History
The Plaintiff filed L.E. & C. Suit No.320/431 of 1981 in the Small Causes Court, Bombay, which was decreed on 17 August 1990. The Defendant appealed to the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court (Appeal No.396 of 1990), which dismissed the appeal on 5 July 1996. The Defendant then filed the present writ petition in the Bombay High Court on 14 February 1997, which was admitted with interim stay. The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 2 November 2017 but restored on 2 July 2018. The original Defendant died during pendency and his legal heirs were brought on record. The petition was finally heard and dismissed on 27 September 2024.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947: 15A
- Presidency Small Causes Court Act, 1888: 41
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XX Rule 12
- Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971: 5A(2)
