KWALITY RUBBER WORKS Vs. IBRAHIM MOHAMMADALI VORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition challenges the judgment and order dated 1 December 2007 (impugned order) made by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dahanu (Civil Court) rejecting the application at Exhibit 46 objecting to continuance of proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 46 of 1999 seeking petitioners eviction from the suit premises consequent upon the provisions of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (Rent Act) becoming applicable to the area where the suit premises are located.

(2.) The suit premises, which comprise godown are located at Vadkun, Dahanu. The Rent Act came into force with effect from 31 March 2000 and extends to the whole of the State of Maharashtra. Section 2(1) of the Rent Act provides that the same shall, in the first instance, apply to premises let for the purposes of residence, education, business, trade or storage in the areas specified in Schedule I and Schedule II. Schedule I (para1 entry 7) makes specific reference to Dahanu Municipal Council. There is no dispute that Vadkun, where the suit premises are located, is included in the territorial extent of said Dahanu Municipal Council. Thus, atleast on and from the commencement of Rent Act with effect from 31 March 2000, by virtue of Section 2(1) of the Rent Act, the same applies to the suit premises. The preamble to the Rent Act declares that the same is an Act to unify, consolidate and amend the law relating to control of rent and repairs of certain premises and of eviction and for encouraging the construction of new houses by assuring a fair return on the investment by landlords and to provide for the matters connected with such purposes.

(3.) The respondent (plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 46 of 1999) on or about 7 June 1999 instituted against the petitionertenant, Regular Civil Suit No. 46 of 1999 seeking eviction from the suit premises, inter alia on the grounds of failure to regularly pay the rent reserved, causing damage to the suit premises and for reasonable and bonafide personal requirement. In such suit, the statement was made at paragraph 11 of the plaint with the suit premises are situated at village Vadkun, Tal. Dahanu and the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act are not applicable to the same. This is reference to the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (1947 Act), which was the law prevalent on the date of institution of the suit.