JUDGMENT -Dr. B.P. SARAF, J.:-By this writ petition the petitioners, who are the trustees of a charitable trust known as "Dhanji Mulji Bhatia Nivas Trust", have challenged the judgment and order dated 26 November, 1986 of the Additional Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay in Appeal No. 185 of 1986 holding, inter alia, that the respondent No. 1 was a protected licensee/deemed tenant as per the provisions of section 35-A(1) read with section 5(4-A) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 ("Bombay Rent Act") in respect of the premises of the trust in her occupation and modifying the order of the trial Court accordingly.

2. The petitioners are the trustees of "Dhanji Mulji Bhatia Nivas Trust". One Haridas Dhanji Mulji, under a trust deed dated 16 October, 1938 created the said trust and settled the property known as Dhanji Mulji Bhatia Nivas, 36/69 Cavel Cross Lane, Kalbadevi Road, Bombay -2, (hereinafter referred to as "the trust property"). The said trust deed provides that the managing trustee or the trustees shall permit or allow the trust property to be used or occupied as residence by poor and indigent members of the Bhatia community free or on payment of nominal fees. The trust deed further provides that the amount of compensation or fees charged from such persons occupying the trust property should not exceed the amount of ground rent, municipal taxes and other outgoings. By the said trust deed the settler also empowered the trustees to frame rules and regulations in respect of the trust property to provide, inter alia, for (a) the admission of deserving poor and indigent Bhatia to the benefits conferred and provided by those trusts; (b) the exclusion of undesirable persons therefrom; (c) the requisites or qualifications for admission; (d) the circumstances under which any occupier may be expelled or any person receiving any benefit thereunder shall be excluded; (e) the cases in which persons other than deserving occupiers or persons may be allowed to occupy any part of the trust premises with deserving occupiers or persons; (f) the nominal fees for rents to be paid by each occupier.

In pursuance of the authority given under the trust deed, the trustees framed rules applicable to persons occupying the trust property. Rules 3, 11, 12, 13 and 20 which have a bearing on the controversy in the present case are set out below :

"2. It is in the diserotion of the Trustees as to who or which family should be permitted to reside in this Nivas and also about the time when the user should be stopped and the premises should be vacated.

11. No family shall keep in the premises any person whose name is not mentioned in the application made by it or permit any one sleep therein without the written permission or keep any person in its premises by taking money or shall bring any sick person or friend without the written permission. None shall keep any longer in this Nivas.

12. No family shall allow any other family or person to use the premises obtained for its own use and if it is found out otherwise than this, then the original family and the persons residing with without it shall be asked to vacate forthwith.

13. If any family keeps closed the premises given for it to use for more than thirty days, it shall be presumed that the family is not in need of the premises and the trustees have power to take possession thereof. If anybody wants to go out for more than thirty days for any important reason he shall have to take permission of the trustess in advance by written application.

20. As this Nivas is constructed for those who are eligible to take its help, the trustees will make inquiries about each family every year and if during the inquiry the trustees find that any family or families is/are not eligible for giving help, the trustees will ask them to vacate the Nivas by 30 days written notice. But the trustees have a right to make any family and the persons residing with him to vacate the premi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document