SAVITRIBAI T PARKAR Vs. PRABHAKAR D SHIRWAIKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a tenants' writ petition and is directed against Order dated 11-9-2006 of the learned Administrative Tribunal, Panaji, upholding the Order dated 4-3-1996 of the Additional Rent Controller directing the eviction of the tenants on the ground of change of user of the suit premises from residential to part commercial under Section 22(2)(b)(ii) of the GDD Buildings (LRE) Control Act, 1968 (Act, for short).

(2.) THERE is hardly any dispute as to the facts. By virtue of a lease agreement dated 12-10-1954 (Exh-0-1) between Ramchandra Sinai Kaissare and Tilu Shet Parkar (deceased husband and father of the present Petitioners), the suit house was let out for residential purposes. The said agreement was signed on behalf of the said Ramchandra Sinai Kaissare by his nephew Anand M. Kaissare and who also collected the rents on behalf of the said Ramchandra Sinai Kaissare till about July, 1972, the last receipt having been issued on 2-1-1973. After the death of the said Ramchandra Sinai Kaissare the suit house came to be allotted to his son and daughter, the latter having married Prabhakar D. Shirwaikar (Respondent No.1 herein).

(3.) THE controversy between the parties centered around the letter dated 2-4-1969 (Exh.R4) which according to the tenants is the written consent given by the landlord for change of user of the residential premises into commercial premises. Learned Counsel on behalf of the tenants submits that the said written consent dated 2-4-1969 was given by the said Anand Kaissare who for all purpose was the landlord of the tenants as contemplated by the relevant provisions of the Act. In other words, the change of part of the premises from residential into commercial by setting up of a bakery therein was done by the tenants with the consent of the said Anand Kaissare who was their landlord. Learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the tenants submits that at no stage the tenants had taken the plea that Anand Kaissare was their landlord. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that at no stage the tenants also denied that the house belonged to the said Ramchandra Sinai Kaissare.