After the termination of tenancy, the ex-tenant's status becomes that of a trespasser, and they cannot claim any benefit or privilege under the Rent Control Order, 1949, which only governs the rights and liabilities of the landlord and the tenant while the relationship subsists.

JUDGMENT - R.M. LODHA, J. :---Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. N.W Sambre, Advocate waives service on behalf of the respondents. At the request of the learned Counsel for the parties, writ petition is finally heard and disposed of at this stage.

2. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking to challenge the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Resident Deputy Collector, Amravati on 4-11-1992 affirming the order passed by the Rent Controller, Amravati on 13-7-1990 whereby the said authorities rejected the application filed by the present petitioners raising objection as regards the tenability of application under Clause 16 of the C.P. Berar Letting of Premises and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short, the 'Rent Control Order, 1949') filed by the present respondents.

3. The undisputed facts are, the petitioners (for short, the 'landlords') are owners of house property situated on Mazul Plot No. 1, Sheet No. 21, Amravati along with open site and the said premises were let out to the respondent No. 1 Shri Shivaji Education Society (for short, the 'tenant') by the father of the present landlords. The landlords moved application before the Rent Controller, Amravati seeking permission to issue quit notice to the tenant and the Rent Controller, Amravati granted such permission on 7-12-1986. Admittedly, the landlords issued notice to quit to the tenant on 8th April, 85 and according to the said notice, the tenancy of the tenant was to come to an and on expiry of tenancy month of May, 1985. There is no dispute that the permission granted to the Rent Controller to issue quit notice to tenant has attained finality right upto the Apex Court and the appeal, writ petition, letters patent appeal and special leave petition filed by the tenant has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority, the Single Bench, the Division Bench of this Court and the Supreme Court respectively.

4. On 5-9-1989, the tenant made an application before the Rent Controller under Clause 16 of the Rent Control Order, 1989 praying therein that the landlords have failed to make necessary repairs to the house let out to the tenant and appropriate order be passed in that connection. The landlords were noticed and upon receipt of the notice, the landlords made an application raising preliminary objection about the maintainability of the application under Clause 16 of the Rent Control Order, 1949 on the ground that the relationship of the landlord and tenant came to an and on expiry of month of May, 1985 as mentioned in the notice to quit dated 8-4-1995 and the occupation of the tenant thereafter was that of a trespasser and, therefore, the application under Clause 16 was not maintainable. The application filed by the landlords has been rejected by the Rent Controller by the order dated 30-7-1990 and the appeal filed by the landlords before the Resident Deputy Collector, Amravati met the same fate and by the order dated 4-11-1992, the appellate authority has upheld the order of the Rent Controller, Amravati.

5. Mr J.K. Chandurkar, the learned Counsel for landlords, contends that after permissions was granted by the Rent Controller the tenancy of the tenant was terminated by the quit notice dated 8th April, 1985 and pursuant thereto the tenancy of the tenant came to an end on the expiry of May, 1985 and thereafter, there was no relationship of landlord and tenant and, therefore, the application filed under Clause 16 of the Rent Control Order, 1949 was not maintainable.

6. The facts stated above are not disputed by the learned Counsel for tenant. But his contention is that though the tenancy came to an end by the notice dated 8-4-1985 on expiry of tenancy month of May, 1985, yet since till date no decree for possession has been passed in favour of the landlords, status of the tenant continues to be the status as such and, therefore, application under Clause 16 of the Rent Control Order, 1949 was main

Click Here to Read the rest of this document