D. B. Bhosale, J. - (1.) All the nine letters patent appeals involve common questions and, therefore, we propose to decide them by a common judgment. Though the appellants in all the appeals are different the facts are similar. The appeals are arising from common orders passed by the authorities below rejecting the applications, filed by the appellants and some other similarly placed persons, under section 22 (l) (a) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (for short the Act). Those orders have been affirmed by the impugned order passed by the learned Single judge in the writ petitions filed by the appellants. The applications under section 22 (l) (a) of the Act were filed seeking permission to institute a suit for recovery of the arrears of rent and on that ground for eviction against the respondent-occupiers of the buildings/ chawls in the slum area. The land and the buildings admittedly situate in the slum area declared under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Act. The learned Single Judge dismissed all the writ petitions filed by the appellants by similar orders in limine. The order passed in the writ petitions and which is impugned in the present appeals dated 26.2.1996 reads thus: "heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioner at length. Perused the impugned order of the Competent Authority and the Tribunal. A careful reading of the impugned orders it is obvious that both the authorities have arrayed at a concurrent finding of fact which is based on material on record that the Petitioners are slumlords and are not entitled to recover rent in respect of the tenements in question. The order are well reasoned. 1 do not find any cogent reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal. Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed".
(2.) F. E. Dinshaw Charities (for short the Trust) were the original owners of the land admeasuring 8 acres situate at Dhanjiwadi, village Malad, Mumbai bearing old survey Nos. 173, 174, 240 and 269 (new survey numbers being 284 (part) and 290). The case set up by the appellants is that the 5 acres out of the aforesaid land was given on lease by the Trust to one Karsan Jivabai on 30. 6.1954 (for short the said land). Karsan Jivabai in turn created sub-lease in favour of various persons including the appellants in the said land between 1954 and 1960. The appellants claim that prior to 1962 they erected several buildings (chawls) in the said land and inducted hundreds of persons therein as their tenants. They further claim that they provided all essential amenities and facilities to their tenants-occupiers and were collecting rent from them. According to the appellants, construction of the chawls in the said land and induction of several persons as their tenants was within the knowledge of Karsan Jivabai as also of the trust to which they never objected to. The appellants claim that they are the owners of the said chawls/buildings standing in the said land.
(3.) On September 30, 1977 a declaration under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Act, thereby declaring the land bearing city survey Nos. 482 to 485 and its division Nos. 489 to 517 and its sub-division situate at Dhanjiwadi, Malad as slum area, was notified in the Official Gazette. The aforestated city survey numbers and the said land situate at Dhanjiwadi, Malad is one and the same. In 1985, the trust after inviting the tenders from prospective buyers offering the entire eight acres of land including the said land for sale on "as is where is" basis, executed a registered sale-deed dated 30. 7.1986, in favour of Dhanjiwadi co-operative Housing Society (for short 'the society') , which is the respondent in all the appeals. The said conveyance was executed after seeking permission of the charity Commissioner under section 36 (l) (a) of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The society purchased the entire 8 acres of land owned by the trust and since then it has become owner of the said land. The occupants of the land/ chawls situate on the said land, are the members of the society. It is an admitted position that the society has undertaken the task of development of the slum. Forty percent of the said land has already been developed by the society. It has demolished the old, dilapidated chawls/ buildings and constructed new buildings and have put the occupiers in possession thereof after seeking permission under section 8 (1) of the Act. Other development is also in progress.;