Interim Order 2

Order Details: Order on Exhibit
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT MUMBAI
[BANDRA BRANCH]
(Appellate Bench)
(CNR NO.MHSCA30010982022 )
ORDER BELOW EXH 10
IN
MISC APPEAL NO. 19 OF 2023
IN
ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT13
IN
RAD SUIT NO. 215 OF 2021
M/s. Dolphin Build Home ...Appellant/
(Original defendants )
V/s.
Malcolm Charles Lourenco Pereira …Respondent/
(Original Plaintiff)
C. R. Yadav : Advocate for the Appellant.
Harsh T. Pawar: Advocate for the Respondents.
Coram : Shri Vilas P. Kadam
Additional Chief Judge,
&
A. H. Baig, Judge,
Court Room No. 41,
Date : 24.07.2023
ORDER: (Per A. H. Baig, Judge)
1. This is an application filed by appellant for granting stay
to the order dated 28.07.2022 passed by the trial court.
2. Perused the application and say filed. Heard both the
learned Advocates for the parties.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
3. By passing order below 13, the trial court has directed the
appellant either to provide transit accommodation or to pay Rs.
10,000/Per month as interim rent to respondent from the date of order
till the disposal of the suit, holding them to be tenants of the premises.
Admittedly, the suit building is pulled down by the Corporation, as the
structure was dangerous. Presently, respondent/ original plaintiff is
shelter less. Appellant/org. Defendant is admittedly, landlord of the
property. It has purchased the property by registered Conveyance
Deed. The names of tenants are annexed to the Conveyance Deed.
4. The copy of said conveyance deed is produced on record,
which shows the list of tenants at page No. 138 of the compilation. The
tenancy right is heritable and transferable. Respondent/original
plaintiff prima facie appears to be tenant. Name of plaintiff or his
predecessor is there in the list of tenants. By purchasing the property,
appellant has entered into the shoes of landlord. There appears
landlord and tenant relationship on the face of record.
5. It is well settled law that tenancy does not come to an end
by demolition of the structure. The interim order is passed only in
respect of providing transit accommodation or transit rent. It is
pertinent to note that though order has been passed in the month of
July, 2022, the appellant has neither made any arrangement, nor paid
single paise towards interim rent in compliance of order, to show its
bonafide. In these facts, if the order is stayed as prayed, it will cause
serious prejudice to the respondent(original plaintiff). On the contrary,
if the order is not stayed, appellant would not suffer any loss as such.
6. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered
opinion that there is no merit in the present application. We do not find
any force in the submissions made on behalf of the appellant for staying
-- 2 of 3 --
3
the proceeding of the trial court. The application is liable to be rejected
with costs. Hence, the order.
O R D E R
The application stands rejected with costs.
I agree,
( Vilas P. Kadam ) ( A.H. Baig )
Additional Chief Judge, Judge
C. R. No. 41 C. R. No. 41
Court of Small Causes,(B.B) Court of Small Causes,(B.B)
24.07.2023 24.07.2023
/home/steno39/Desktop/CR41/JULY2023/ORDER/EXH10APPEAL192023 stay to order.odt
-- 3 of 3 --