LAWS(GJH)-2022-3-1494

HEIRS OF DECD NIYAZAHMED MOHAMMED YUSUF ANSARI Vs. HEIRS OF DECD JASHUBHAI HARMANBHAI PATEL ATULBHAI JASHUBHAI PATEL

Decided On March 09, 2022
Heirs Of Decd Niyazahmed Mohammed Yusuf Ansari Appellant
V/S
Heirs Of Decd Jashubhai Harmanbhai Patel Atulbhai Jashubhai Patel Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Application is filed by the applicants, who are original plaintiffs, who preferred Regular Civil Suit No.113 of 2017 in the Court of learned Principal Civil Judge, Galteshwar at Sevalia, against an order dtd. 10/11/2021 passed below Exh.30. Though no copy of plaint is produced on record of this case, it is submitted that it has been filed to assert the tenancy over the suit premises.

(2.) However, during pendncy of the aforesaid suit, an application Exh.30 came to be filed by the applicants-original plaintiffs seeking permission to construct the suit premises as it is in a dilapidated condition, it being constructed 40 years back. It is asserted in the said application that the plaintiffs were tenants in the suit property, and therefore, they have right to construct over the suit property, which is in a dilapidated condition in view of the provisions of the Gujarat Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Rent Act '. . Though the application is not making out under what provision it is made, the learned Judge vide impugned judgment and order dtd. 10/11/2021 rejected the application Exh.30 against which this Revision Application is filed.

(3.) Mr.Aziz Alvi, learned advocate for the applicants submitted that they have filed a suit for retaining possession as tenant of the suit premises and they have right to possess the same. He has further submitted that in the suit premises, the applicants - plaintiffs are tenants since long, and therefore, they have right to prefer the application, which is filed and which is under consideration. He has further asserted that since about more than 40 years, the applicants - plaintiffs are in possession of the suit property. He has further submitted that the applicants - plaintiffs have no other property for their business and the suit property being garage, which is the only source of earning of whole family, required to be repaired / constructed under the permission of the Court. He has submitted that this Revision Application be admitted and allowed.