IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Z.K. Saiyed, J.
Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. – Appellant
Vs.
Minaben Rajesh Sanghavi and Ors. – Respondents
Civil Revision Application Nos. 244 to 247 of 2013
Decided On : 23-08-2016
Result—Revision applications dismissed.
Z.K. Saiyed, J.
1. The present Civil Revision Applications are preferred by the applicant challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 12.06.2013 passed by the learned Judge of Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad dismissing the Civil Appeal Nos. 100/2011 to 103/2011 and confirming the judgment and decree dated 05.09.2011 in H.R.P. Suit Nos. 988/2008, 989/2008, 3262/2004 and H.R.P. Suit No. 3263/2004 passed by the learned Judge, Court No. 8, Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad.
2. The brief facts of the present case are as under:--
"The original plaintiffs - respondents herein leased out the premises i.e. ground floor paiki Block No. A admeasuring about 184 square yard, carpet area 1268 square feet and Block No. B admeasuring about 184 square yard, carpet area 1268 square feet of building known as "Shivprasad' situated at Hindu Colony, bungalow No. 7, Opp. Vallabhbhai Stadium, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad which is under T.P. Scheme No. 3 of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation bearing Final Plot Nos. 221, 222, 223, 229 and 230 (for short "the suit premises") to the present applicant - original appellant - defendant on 15.08.1981 by the then owners and now the rent of the said premises is Rs. 6902.00 for each month for each block. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the suit premises is leased out for use of office purpose and land of margin is not leased out to the applicant. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the lease period has come to an end. It is further the case of the plaintiffs that the applicant - defendant is using the suit premises in breach of the lease agreement and the suit premises are being used for storage and delivery of gas cylinders to its customers and is using open land for storing gas cylinders. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the applicant - defendant has erected rooms and made construction of permanent nature. Therefore, the suits being H.R.P. Suit No. 989/2008, H.R.P. Suit No. 3262/2004 and H.R.P. Suit No. 3263/2004 came to be filed with regard to other portions of the suit premises. The plaintiffs claimed the possession of the suit premises from the defendant for breach of the provisions of the Explosive Act, for change of user on the ground of permanent construction and on the ground of nuisance and annoyance. The plaintiffs have also claimed mesne profit and permanent injunction restraining the defendant from storing and distributing gas cylinders from the suit premises and from using open land of the suit premises and from making hurdles on internal road of the society. It is submitted that H.R.P. Suit No. 988/2008 came to be filed by the present original plaintiffs to recover the possession and for mesne profit and permanent injunction in respect of block No. 1 of the suit premises. The learned Judge, Small Cause Court No. 8, Ahmedabad vide impugned judgment and order dated 05.09.2011 decreed H.R.P. Suit Nos. 988/2008 and 989/2008 whereas H.R.P. Suit Nos. 3262/2004 and 3263/2004 for permanent injunction are concerned, instead of granting permanent injunction, the learned Judge ordered that the defendant shall abide and obey the order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application Nos. 17281/2005 to 17283/2005 till the possession of the suit premises are handed over by the defendant to the plaintiffs. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 05.09.2011 passed by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court No. 8, Ahmedabad, the defendant - Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation filed Civil Appeal Nos. 100/2011 to 103/2011. The Appellate Bench of Small Cause Court, Ahmedabad, vide common judgment dated 12.06.2013 dismissed the appeals and passed the order of eviction on the ground of nuisance and annoyance as per section 13(1)(c) of the Gujarat Rent, Hotel and Lodging House Rent Control Act, 1947. Hence, these Civil Revision Applications."
3. Heard Mr. K.M. Patel, learned senior counsel with Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. S.I. Nanavati, learned s
Ahmedsaheb (dead) by Lrs. & Ors. v. Sayed Ismail
Gundalapalli Rangamannar Chetty v. Desu Rangiah
Gurdial Batra v. Raj Kumar Jain reported in (1989) 3 SCC 441
Hari Rao v. N. Govindachari reported in (2005) 7 SCC 643
Hareshbhai Gordhanbhai Amin v. Vanmalidas Parmandas Patel reported in 1998 (3) GLR 2427
Jagdish Lal v. Parma Nand reported in (2000) 5 SCC 44
Kasturbhai Ramchand Panchal and Brothers v. Firm of Mohanlal Nathubhai
K.G. Saha and Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Development Consultant Ltd.
Mohammed Musa Sahib (died) v. N.K. Mohammed Ghouse Sahib
Raichand Jani v. Miss Chandra Kanta Khosla
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.