Judgment :

1) The issue involved in the Revision Application and Writ Digitally signed by MEGHA M SHE RG EH EA DHARS PAH RR AE BEDHAR Petition is about right of the Revision Applicant and Writ Petitioner PARAB Date:

2024.10.21 17:23:33 +0530 to retain possession of the flat in question. Revision Applicant-Ganesh Arjun Chukkal (Ganesh Chukkal) is a director in the Petitioning Com pany-Brice Infrastructure and Development Pvt. Ltd (Brice) Entry into the subject flat is secured by Brice on 20 June 2018 by way of license granted by Respondent and in his capacity as director of Brice, the Revision Applicant- Ganesh Chukkal is occupying the flat. Upon expiry of license on 19 April 2020, the Competent Authority directed eviction of Brice from the flat by order dated 23 November 2021, which order is upheld by Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division on 13 March 2023 by rejecting Brice’s Revision Application. Accordingly, Brice has filed Writ Petition No.1847 of 2024 challenging the eviction order of Competent Authority as well as order of the Revisional Authority. Revision Applicant- Ganesh Chukkal claims to be a lessee in respect of the flat on the strength of alleged lease agreement executed in his favour on 8 March 2019 and has accordingly filed declaratory suit bearing L.D. Suit No.80 of 2022 in the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai, seeking a declaration that he is a lessee in respect of the flat and for restraining the Respondent from disturbing his possession. In that Suit, the Revision Applicant filed application for temporary injunction, which was initially allowed by the Trial Court by order dated 30 September 2022 and was confirmed by further order dated 10 January 2024. The said injunction order has been vacated by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court vide judgment and order dated 30 January 2024, which is the subject matter of challenge in Civil Revision Application No. 96 of 2024 filed by Revision Applicant-Ganesh Chukkal. Since both the proceedings relate to right of occupation of same premises, both the proceedings are heard and decided by this common order. There are three parties in the present proceedings viz. (i) Ganesh Chukkal who claims to be lessee of the flat and who is Plaintiff in L.D. Suit No.80 of 2022, (ii) Brice, who is the Licencee under the leave and license agreement and who was the Respondent in Eviction proceedings filed before Competent Authority and (iii) Melronia Hospitality Private Limited, (Melronia) who is the Defendant in the Suit and Applicant in the eviction application.

2) A very brief reference to the facts of the case would be necessary. Ganesh Chukkal claims that M/s. Lake View Developers had executed agreement dated 19 February 2004 in his favour thereby appointing him as Liaison Officer for securing various permissions from regulatory authorities and doing of various acts as enumerated in the agreement, for which he was to receive either monetary consideration of Rs.14.50 crores or in the alternate constructed area admeasuring 4,000/- sq.ft in the salable component of redevelopment of the project. The agreement was allegedly executed in connection with a redevelopment scheme undertaken by well-known developer in Mumbai viz. Hiranandani Group through its Firm M/s. Lake View Developers. According to Ganesh Chukkal, the said Firm-M/s. Lake View Developers as well as other subsidiary companies of Hiranandani were amalgamated in one company M/s. HGP Community Private Limited (HGP). HGP later merged with Defendant- Melronia on 24 August 2018.

3) According to Ganesh Chukkal, the agreement dated 19 February 2004 was executed in his favour for the purpose of assisting Hiranandani Group of companies to develop slum rehabilitation scheme on Survey No.136 C.T.S. No. 1 (part), village-Ghatkopar, Mumbai. That he performed various acts as per the agreement and assisted M/s. Lake View Developers to procure various NOCs from statutory authorities and assisted in shifting of more than 800 slum dwelle