ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Pandey, learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners and Ms. Minakshi Surve, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondents.

2. By the present Petition, the Petitioners are challenging the order dated 6th August, 2025 passed by the Appellate Bench of learned Small Causes Court, Mumbai, in Revision Application No. 67 of 2025, whereby the Appellate Bench was pleased to dismiss the application filed by the Judgment-Debtor under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and upheld the order dated 27th January, 2025 passed by the learned Small Causes Court in Exhibit-20.

3. The facts giving rise to the present Writ Petition, in brief, are that R.A.E. Suit No. 574 of 2007 was instituted by the Respondents against the original tenants and obtained a decree dated 24th August, 2015 in their favour. The original Defendant preferred an Appeal No. 475 of 2015 against the decree of eviction, which came to be dismissed.

4. Upon dismissal of the Appeal, the Respondents/Plaintiffs instituted execution proceedings bearing Execution Application No. 331 of 2016, before the learned Small Causes Court. By an order dated 26th August 2024, the Executing Court issued a Warrant of Possession. In the said execution proceedings, the Petitioners filed an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 at Exhibit-20, raising an objection as to the executability of decree on the ground that the execution was barred by the provisions of Section 22(1)(b) of the Slum Act as the Plaintiffs had failed to obtain requisite permission from the Competent Authority to execute the decree. The said application came to be dismissed by the learned Trial Court by order dated 27th January, 2025. The said order was challenged before the Appellate Bench of learned Small Causes Court in Revision Application No. 67 of 2025.

5. It is pertinent to note that during the pendency of the said Appeal in execution proceedings, the larger property, including the suit premises situated on C.T.S. Nos. 197 and 197/1 to 10, admeasuring 1543.8 sq.meters, came to be declared as a Slum Area under the provisions of Section 4(1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (“Slum Act”) on 18th December, 2018. By order dated 6th August, 2025, the Appellate Bench has dismissed the Revision Application, against which the present Petition is filed.

6. Learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that since the suit premises was included in the area declared as a Slum Area on 18th December, 2018, permission of the Competent Authority is required to proceed with the eviction application of the Decree Holder, in view of the bar under Section 22(1)(b) of the Slum Act.

7. In support of his submissions, learned Advocate for the Petitioners has relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Gauri Pannalal Prajapati v/s. Harishankar Dudhnath Yadav¹Writ Petition No. 2588 of 2019 along with other Writ Petitions decided on 25th July,2019.

8. Per contra, learned Advocate for the Respondents/Decree Holders submits that the execution application was instituted in the year 2016, much prior to the declaration of the suit property as a Slum Area within the provisions of Slum Act. It is, therefore, submitted that the requirement of obtaining prior permission of the Competent Authority under Section 22(1)(b) of the Slum Act would not arise in the course of execution of a decree.

9. Admittedly, the suit property is declared as slum on 18th December, 2018 after filing of the execution proceedings in the year 2016. The issue involved in the present Petition is ‘whether the execution can proceed without permission of the Competent Authority under Section 22(1)(b) of the Slum Act?’

10. Section 22(1)(b) of the Slum Act is relevant and is noted below for ready reference :-

“22. Proceedings for eviction of occupiers [or for issue of distress warrant] not to be taken without permission of Competent Authority.— (1) Notwithstan