NIRAV RAJENDRAKUMAR SHAH Vs. ABDULSALAM ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Mr. Sahil Shah, learned advocate for Mr. Hardik Dave, learned advocate for the respondent waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. Having regard to the controversy involved in the present case and with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken for final hearing today.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 3.5.2012 passed by the learned Ad -hoc Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Vapi below Exhibit -5 in Regular Civil Suit No.20 of 2012 and the order dated 11.9.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal (Appeal from Order) No.11 of 2012 whereby the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate has been confirmed.

(3.) THE facts of the case stated briefly are that the first respondent herein filed Regular Civil Suit No.20 of 2012 before the learned Principal Civil Judge, Vapi seeking injunction contending that the tenancy rights of the plaintiff were affected by the act of demolition of the residential structure being Municipal House No.1459/0 (originally constructed on City Survey No.1311). The petitioner along with the other defendants contested the said suit by filing a written statement at Exhibit -18 submitting that the suit was not maintainable before the civil court as the plaintiff was not a tenant under section 5(11)(c) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. It was pointed out that prior to the suit, the tenanted premises had been demolished and there was no cause to seek such reliefs. In the said suit, the plaintiff made an application (Exhibit -5) seeking injunction, which came to be allowed by the order dated 3.5.2012 directing the parties to maintain status quo with respect to the property being City Survey No.1311. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad, who, vide order dated 11.9.2014 dismissed the appeal.