CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(1999) 09 BOM CK 0057

Bahadur Singh Alias Amar Bahadur Singh vs Umarkadi Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd.

Bombay High Court · Decided on 8 September 1999 · Citation: (2000) 102 BOMLR 638

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.L. Gokhale, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 2205 of 1999

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 360 words

H.L. Gokhale, J.—Heard Mr. Kini for the petitioner and Mr. Punwani for the Respondent.

2.

Mr. Punwani had filed a reply on behalf of the respondent which is taken on record.

3.

The petitioner had tried to canvass before the Appellate Court and has also tried to canvass before me that the property wherein the particular room is situated belongs to the Bombay Diocesan Trust. He has not traced his authority to occupy the concerned room through this Trust nor has he produced any document of the Trust nor has he led any evidence in that behalf. He does not dispute that he is occupying the particular room as an employee of the respondent No. 1 society. This being the position, it is totally irrelevant as to whether the property is owned by the said Trust inasmuch as his possession was through t the society which has terminated his right to occupy the room. He has no authority to continue. The courts below have therefore correctly granted the decree to the society. There is no reason to interfere with the order passed. Petition is rejected.

4.

Although the Co-operative Appellate Court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner, it stayed the operation of the order till 31st August, 1999. Mr. Kini seeks continuation of stay for a period of 4 weeks more. On this Mr. Punwani points out that the petitioner has been occupying the particular room without paying anything and the manse profits worked out by the Trial Court upto date come to Rs. 3,000/-. Mr. Kini states that the petitioner is prepared to pay Rs. 2.000/-. The protection available to the petitioner will continue for a period of 4 weeks from today provided he pays the amount of Rs. 2.000/- to the respondent Society within 2 weeks from today.

5.

The petitioner undertakes through his counsel that he will not part with possession nor he will induct any third party rights in the said room. He will give them a notice of 2 days in advance in the event he files any appeal.

Parties to act on the ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Personal Secretary.