1. This Writ Petition was placed at Serial No.925 i.e. on the supplementary Board of today’s Board. Since the Court was busy in hearing matters from the regular Board and earlier matters from the supplementary Board, this Petition could not be taken up till 5 p.m. today. Considering the urgency, the Petition was mentioned at 5 p.m. and the learned Advocates for the Petitioners and Respondent have agreed to advance their arguments /submissions beyond normal working hours of the Court after 5 p.m.. I have accordingly heard the Petition.

2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

3. The Petitioners are original Plaintiffs in R.A.D. Suit No. 1094 of 2011 filed in the Court of the Small Causes Court, Mumbai for declaration of tenancy in respect of the suit premises. Written statement has been filed by the Respondent-Defendant and the written statement has been subsequently amended by allowing the Applications of the Respondent-Defendant.

4. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that one Icchashankar H. Dave was inducted as tenant in the suit premises, who died in the year 2002 and that the Plaintiffs are daughter-in-law and grandson respectively of said Icchashankar Dave, whose son Bhaskar had predeceased him in the year, 2001. In the written statement, it is the case of the Respondent that in the year 1980 or thereabout the said Icchashankar H. Dave was given possession of the suit premises as gratis and he was occupying the suit premises as gratuitous licensee.

5. In the Suit, the Petitioners filed an Application below Exh. 9, seeking interim reliefs, which read thus:

[a] Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present suit, the defendant, his servants and agents be restrained by an order and injunction of this Hon’ble Court from dispossessing the plaintiffs without due process of law and/or interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful use, occupation and possession of the suit premises.

[b] Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present suit, the defendant, his servants and agents be directed by a mandatory order of the court to restore the electricity to the suit premises and/or in the alternative to give consent for obtaining separate electric connection in the suit premises.

[c] Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present suit, the defendant, his servants and agents be directed by a mandatory order of the court to restore the water supply to the suit premises from the overhead water tank on the terrace on the 6th floor and/or in the alternative to give consent for obtaining separate water connection in the suit premises.

6. The Application Exh. 9 was opposed by filing Reply by adopting averments in the written statement and the Plaintiffs filed Rejoinder. Various documents, letters, photocopies, entries in the rent diary, electricity bills etc. were produced.

7. It is not in dispute that the Respondent has filed L.E. & C. Suit No. 91/120 of 2011 against the present Petitioners in the court of Small Causes at Mumbai. The Petitioners who are Defendants in that suit have already filed written statement in the suit and Mr. Vora, Advocate for the Respondent, states that in all probabilities the issues have also been framed very recently.

8. The Trial Court recorded a finding of fact to the effect that the Petitioners are in physical possession of the suit premises. This finding of fact is recorded in paragraph 8 of the Judgment of the Trial Court delivered on 22.7.2011. Ultimately, the Trial Court concluded in paragraphs 13 and 14 which read thus:

13] As per said provision the defendant is having every right to obtain independent electric meter for the suit premises, without no objection of the landlord. Hence, so far as electric supply is concerned this not necessary to give the separate directions to the landlord.

14] It is admitted fact that defendant has put h is locks to the water tank from which the plaintiffs was used to obtain th