M/S. Manilal Patel And Company vs The Board Of Trustees Of The Port Of ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 25402 Bom

Bombay High Court

M/S. Manilal Patel And Company vs The Board Of Trustees Of The Port Of ... on 4 September, 2024

2024:BHC-AS:35579
                       Sonali Mane                                                                  9-CRA-253-2024.docx



                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION



                                     CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 253 OF 2024



                       M/s. Manilal Patel And Company & Anr.                                 ... Applicants
                                Versus
                       The Board Of Trustees of
                       The Port of Bombay & Ors.                                             ... Respondents




                       Mr. Ranjit A. Thorat, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Pratibha Shelake for
                       the Applicants.
                       Mr. Roopadaksha Basu i/b M/s. Law Point for the Respondent No.1.



                                                              CORAM        : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

                                                              DATE         : 4 SEPTEMBER 2024.
                       P.C. :


                       1)               This Revision Application is filed challenging Order dated

18 November 2021 passed by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court making Obstructionist Notice No. 42 of 2022 taken out by the Plaintiffs Decree Holder absolute and directing Applicants / Obstructionist to hand over possession of the suit premises to the Plaintiffs. The Order dated 18 November 2021 has been confirmed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court by dismissing

Digitally signed by MANE MANE SONALI ___Page No.1 of 2___ SONALI DILIP DILIP Date:

2024.09.05 10:59:01 +0530 4 September 2024

Sonali Mane 9-CRA-253-2024.docx

Execution Appeal No. 7 of 2022 by Judgment and Order dated 30 January 2024.

2) I have heard Mr. Thorat, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Revision Applicant. Mr. Basu, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent/Plaintiffs.

3) After having heard the learned counsel appearing for parties and after going through the concurrent findings recorded by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court and its Appellate Bench, I am unable to hold that the Obstructionist are in position to establish any independent right or title in respect of the suit premises. Their mere possession of the suit premises for long time, would not confer upon them any right in view of fact that the Original Defendants themselves are not tenants in respect of the suit premises and the suit was not filed for recovery of possession under the provisions of Bombay Rent Act. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference in revisionary jurisdiction by this Court in the concurrent findings recorded by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court and its Appellate Bench.

4) Civil Revision Application is accordingly rejected. However, Applicants are granted time for eight weeks to vacate the suit premises.

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

___Page No.2 of 2___ 4 September 2024