[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
D G M And A Operated S A B English Medium ... vs Shivaji Laxman Bhamare on 18 December, 2025
Author: Madhav J. Jamdar
Bench: Madhav J. Jamdar
2025:BHC-AS:56527 911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.16995 OF 2025
D. G. M. & A Operated S. A. B. English Medium
School through Principal Ashwini Harish
Suryawanshi ...Petitioner
Versus
Shivaji Laxman Bhamare ...Respondent
Mr. Jayendra Khairnar a/w. Mr. Harsh Nishar a/w. Ms. Gauri
Kulkarni and Ms. Aleema Bohra, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Aditya S. Chandak, for the Respondent.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18th DECEMBER 2025
DATE OF UPLOADING: 20th DECEMBER 2025
JUDGMENT:
1. Heard Mr. Jayendra Khairnar, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner and Mr. Chandak, learned Counsel appearing for the
Respondent.
2. By the present Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, the challenge is to the legality and validity of
the order dated 25th August 2025 passed by the Additional Divisional
Commissioner (Rent Act), Nashik Division, Nashik in
Appeal/Revision No.275 of 2025 filed under Section 44 of the
Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 ("Rent Act") as also to the
Page 1
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
order dated 23rd August 2024 passed by the Competent Authority,
Rent Control Act Court, Nashik Division, Nashik in Application
No.4 of 2023 filed under Section 24 of the Rent Act.
3. By the impugned order of the Competent Authority, the
Petitioner has been directed to handover the vacant and peaceful
possession of the subject premises and further has been directed to
pay license fee at the double rate i.e. Rs.5,000/-x 2= Rs.10,000/- per
month from 18th June 2020 till handing over the possession of the
subject premises to the Respondent. The said order has been
confirmed by the learned Additional Divisional Commissioner,
Nashik Division, Nashik by the impugned order dated 25 th August
2025.
4. It is the contention of learned Counsel appearing for the
Petitioner that the premises has been given specifically for running an
English Medium School. He therefore, submits that the Competent
Authority exercising power under Section 24 read with Section 42 of
the Rent Act has no jurisdiction to deal with the said application as
admittedly, the subject premises has been taken on Leave and
License basis for running an English Medium School.
Page 2
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
5. On the other hand, Mr. Chandak, learned Counsel appearing
for the Respondent submits that Leave and License Agreement was
for a period of three years w.e.f. 10 th June 2017. The Petitioner has
continued to occupy the subject premises even thereafter. Learned
Counsel, therefore submits that the Competent Authority has rightly
passed the order of eviction which has been confirmed by the
Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik.
6. Perusal of the record shows that clause No.2 of the Leave and
License Agreement dated 10th June 2017 executed between the
Respondent (Licensor) and the Petitioner (Licensee) specifically
provides that subject premises has been given for running an English
Medium School.
7. In view of the said specific term in the written Leave and
License Agreement dated 10th June 2017, it is necessary to set out
certain provisions of the Rent Act.
i. Sub-Section (1) of Section 24 of the Rent Act:
"24. Landlord entitled to recover possession of
premises given on licence on expiry
Page 3
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, a
licensee, in possession or occupation of premises
given to him on license for residence shall deliver
possession of such premises to the landlord on expiry
of the period of licence; and on the failure of the
licensee to so deliver the possession of the licensed
premises, a landlord shall be entitled to recover
possession of such premises from a licensee, on the
expiry of the period of licence, by making an
application to the Competent Authority, and the
Competent Authority, on being satisfied that the
period of licence has expired, shall pass an order for
eviction of a licensee."
(Emphasis added)
ii. Explanation (a) to Section 24:
"(a) the expression "landlord" includes a successor-
in-interest who becomes the landlord of the premises
as a result of death of such landlord; but does not
include a tenant or a sub-tenant who has given
premises on license;"
iii. Chapter VIII of the Rent Act consisting of Sections 39 to 52
provides for summary disposal of certain applications.
iv. Sub-Section (1) of Section 40:
"40 Appointment of Competent Authority
(1) The State Government may, by notification in the
Official Gazette, appoint one or more persons to be
called Competent Authority for the purpose of
exercising the powers conferred, and for performing
the duties imposed, on him under this Act in such
local area as may be specified in the said notification;
Page 4
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
and one or more such Competent Authorities may be
appointed for one or more such local areas."
(Emphasis added)
v. Section 41:
"41. Definition of landlord for the purpose of
Chapter VIII
For the purposes this Chapter, landlord means
a landlord who is,--
(a) a person who has created a service tenancy
in respect of his premises or a part thereof in
favour of his employee under section 22;
(b) a member of the armed forces of the Union
or a scientist or a Government servant or a
successor-in-interest, referred to in section 23;
or
(c) a person who has given premises on licence
for residence or a successor-in-interest referred
to in section 24. "
(Emphasis added)
vi. Section 42.
"42. Special provision for making application to
Competent Authority by landlord to evict tenant or
licensee
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or
any other Law for the time being in force or any
contract to the contrary or any judgment or decree or
order of any court, but subject to the provisions of
section 22 or 23 or 24, as the case may be, a landlord
may submit an application to the Competent
Authority, signed and verified in a manner provided
Page 5
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
in rules 14 and 15 of Order VI of the First Schedule
to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), as if
it were a plaint, to the Competent Authority having
jurisdiction in the area in which the premises are
situated, for the purpose of recovery of possession of
the premises from the tenant or licensee, as the case
may be."
(Emphasis added)
8. An analysis of the above provisions and other relevant
provisions makes it very clear that the Chapter VIII of the Rent Act
provides for summary disposal of certain applications and
appointment of Competent Authority. The Applications for recovery
of possession inter alia as contemplated by Section 24 of the Rent
Act, are to be filed before the Competent Authority appointed under
Section 40 of the Rent Act. Section 41 of the Rent Act, set out the
definition of "landlord" for the purpose of Chapter VIII of the Rent
Act, which specifically provides that inter alia, a person who has
given premises on licence for residence or a successor-in-interest
referred to in section 24 is the landlord for the purpose of Chapter
VIII. Thus, it is clear that clause (c) of Section 41 of the Rent Act
clearly provides that landlord contemplated for the purpose of
Chapter VIII is a person who has given premises on licence for
residence or a successor-in-interest referred to in Section 24. Thus,
Page 6
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
once it is provided in the written leave and license agreement that the
premises are given for occupation on leave and license basis for the
purposes other than the residence, then in that case it is clear that
Competent Authority exercising jurisdiction under Chapter VIII will
have no jurisdiction to deal with the same.
9. As admittedly, the subject premises has not been given for
residence and they have been given for running an English Medium
School, it is very clear that the Application filed before the
Competent Authority is not maintainable in view of the specific
provisions under Section 24 read with Section 41 and 42 of the Rent
Act. Thus, the impugned order which has been passed by the
Competent Authority as confirmed by the Additional Divisional
Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik is without jurisdiction.
10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 23 rd August 2024
passed in Application No.4 of 2023 by the Competent Authority
(Rent Control), Nashik Division, Nashik as also the order dated 25 th
August 2025 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner,
Nashik Division, Nashik in Appeal/Revision No.275 of 2025 are
quashed and set aside and the said Application No.4 of 2022 is
dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Page 7
Sonali
911-WP-16995-2025.DOC
11. However, at this stage, Mr. Chandak, learned Counsel
appearing for the Respondent raises the contention that for last 65
months, the Petitioner has not paid even the agreed compensation as
per the said agreement dated 10th June 2017. In view of the said
contention raised by the learned Counsel appearing for the
Respondent, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, on
instructions of the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner will make
payment of Rs.2,40,000/- to the Respondent within a period of three
months from today. The said statement, made on the instructions, is
accepted as undertaking given to the Court. It is clarified that the
said payment is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of
both the parties.
12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms
with no order as to costs.
13. Needless to observe that as the impugned orders are set aside
only on the ground of jurisdiction, the Respondent is at liberty to
adopt appropriate proceedings seeking eviction or any other relief
before the appropriate Court and all contentions in that behalf are
SONALI
MILIND expressly kept open.
PATIL
PATIL [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 8
Sonali
