Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: Dr. Suresh Ratanlal Jain Vs. Medical Superintendent & Anr.
Misc.Appeal No. 19 of 2021
Received on : 20.02.2020
Registered on : 30.03.2020
Decided on : 09.08.2021
Duration : Y01 M05 D19
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
Misc. Appeal No.19 of 2021
(CNR No.MHCC010022582020)
Dr. Suresh Ratanlal Jain
Age 62 years, Occ: Service,
Presently residing at Type 5,
Flat No.5, Doctor's Quarter, ESIS Hospital, ..Appellant/
Worli, Mumbai 400 018 (Org. Opponent)
Versus
1. The Medical Superintendent
Employees State Insurance
Scheme Hospital ..Respondent No.1/
Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 (Ori. Applicant)
2. The Competent Authority Greater
Mumbai Court,
404, 4th floor, New D.D.Building,
Old Custom House,
S.B.S. Road, Fort, Mumbai 1 ..Respondent No.2
APPEARANCES
For the appellant:
− None present
For the respondent:
− None present
Coram : H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
S.B.AGRAWAL (C.R.No.19)
Dated : 9th August, 2021
Page 1 of 5
9th August, 2021
-- 1 of 5 --
Dr. Suresh Ratanlal Jain Vs. Medical Superintendent & Anr.
Misc.Appeal No. 19 of 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT:
Order passed by the Competent Authority under The Bombay
Government Premises (Eviction)Act, 1955 directing eviction of the
appellant from Government Premises namely Type5, Flat No.5,
Doctor's Quarter, ESIS Hospital, Worli, Mumbai– 400 018 and awarding
damages is assailed in the present appeal.
2. It is to be noted that since last six dates service on the
respondents has not been completed and even today nobody is
appearing for the appellant in the matter.
3. If the Memorandum of appeal and impugned order are perused, it
would be apparent that the appellant was allotted the Government
premises since he was working in Worli Hospital as XRay Technician
and in such circumstances, the Government Premises allotted to the
appellant was in the nature of service tenancy. On 30.6.2017, the
appellant retired from the service and since he did not vacate the
subject premises despite notice, proceedings as aforesaid were initiated
and the order of eviction and damages was passed.
4. From the grounds raised in the appeal, following points arise for
my consideration and my findings thereon for the reasons therefor are
as under:
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether the appellant is in unauthorized
occupation of the subject premises?
..In the affirmative
Page 2 of 5
9th August, 2021
-- 2 of 5 --
Dr. Suresh Ratanlal Jain Vs. Medical Superintendent & Anr.
Misc.Appeal No. 19 of 2021
2. Whether the principles of natural justice
were followed while passing the impugned
order?
..In the affirmative.
3. Whether the quantification of
damages/compensation is just, proper and
legal?
..In the affirmative.
4. Whether the impugned order is just, proper
and legal?
..In the affirmative.
5. What Order? ..As per final order.
R E A S O N S
Point Nos.1 to 4:
5. It is contended that composite application for eviction and
compensation was not maintainable and that retrospective damages
would not have been awarded. It is also claimed that principles of
natural justice were not followed and on all these grounds, eviction is
sought to be assailed.
6. It is not in dispute that the appellant retired way back on
30.6.2017 and if thereafter, the appellant had not vacated the premises,
he is in unauthorized occupation of the subject premises and as such,
order of eviction cannot be faulted with, for any reason. There is no
justification in saying that the composite application was not
maintainable and there is nothing to show that the appellant had any
arguable point to be urged before the Competent Authority and as such
assuming that there exists a ground of violation of principles of natural
justice, same would not be of any avail to the appellant.
Page 3 of 5
9th August, 2021
-- 3 of 5 --
Dr. Suresh Ratanlal Jain Vs. Medical Superintendent & Anr.
Misc.Appeal No. 19 of 2021
7. As far as damages is concerned, perusal of the impugned order
would reveal that the same is assessed on the basis of Government
Resolution issued to that effect. In such circumstances even otherwise
on merits, no case is made out. As such, I answer the points accordingly
and pass following order:
ORDER
Misc. Appeal No. 19 of 2021 stands dismissed.
09.08.2021 (S.B.AGRAWAL)
Principal Judge,
City Civil Court,
Gr.Bombay.
Dictated on : 09.08.2021
Transcribed on : 09.08.2021
Signed by HHJ on : 09.08.2021
Page 4 of 5
9th August, 2021
-- 4 of 5 --
Dr. Suresh Ratanlal Jain Vs. Medical Superintendent & Anr.
Misc.Appeal No. 19 of 2021
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Stenographers: B.S. Parab
Upload date and time: 09.08.2021 (at 5.28 p.m.)
Name of the Judge H.H.THE SESSIONS JUDGE,
Shri S.B.AGRAWAL(C.R.No.19)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 09.08.2021
Order signed by P.O. on 09.08.2021
Order uploaded on 09.08.2021
Page 5 of 5
9th August, 2021
-- 5 of 5 --