{1}

939-WP-1748-2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.1748 OF 2022

Surekha w/o Vijay Petkar

(Surekha d/o Shivajirao Naikwade)

Age- 40 years, Occu- Business,

R/o. Opp. Gujrati High School,

Vazirabad, Nanded. ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

Sunita w/o Sanjay Kshirsagar

Age- 56 years, Occ- Household,

R/o. Kankavya Compound,

Gurudwara, Gate No. 2, Nanded. ...RESPONDENT

ALONG WITH

WRIT PETITION NO. 1484 OF 2022

Sunita w/o Sanjay Kshirsagar

Age- 56 years, Occ- Household,

R/o. Kankavya Compound,

Gurudwara, Gate No. 2, Nanded. ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

Surekha w/o Vijay Petkar

(Surekha d/o Shivajirao Naikwade)

Age- 40 years, Occu- Business,

R/o. Opp. Gujrati High School,

Vazirabad, Nanded. ...RESPONDENT

Bhagyawant Punde

{2}

939-WP-1748-2022

Advocate for Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1748/2022 and

Respondent in Writ Petition No. 1484/2022 : Mr. Shahaji Ghatol Patil

Advocate for Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1484 of 2022 and

Respondent in Writ Petition No. 1748/2022 : Mr. G.R. Syed

.......

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

DATE : 29

^th MARCH, 2022

JUDGMENT :

1.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

consent of the parties.

2.

Since common question of law and facts is involved in

these petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by

this common judgment.

3.

In Writ Petition No. 1748/2022, the petitioner/tenant has

challenged the order passed by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-1,

Nanded in M.C.A. No. 04/2021 thereby dismissing the application

Exhibit-5 granted by the trial Court.

4.

In Writ Petition No. 1484/2022, the defendant/landlord

has challenged the order of stay granted by the appellate Court after

allowing her appeal for a period of 90 days.

Bhagyawant Punde

{3}

939-WP-1748-2022

5.

The tenant was inducted in the suit premises in the year

2009 by rent agreement of 11 months. The agreement was renewed

time to time and the last renewal was on 01.11.2019 till 30.10.2020. It

is the case of the tenant that on 25.05.2020, the defendant/landlord is

forcibly trying to evict the tenant. The tenant therefore, filed Regular

Civil Suit No. 330/2020 seeking injunction, restraining the landlord or

anybody claiming on behalf of her from disturbing the peaceful

possession of the suit shops taken on rent by the tenant and also

seeking injunction from dispossession of said shops.

6.

In the said suit the trial Court after hearing the parties

allowed the Exhibit-5 filed by the tenant holding that the tenancy

agreement of the tenant expired on 30.10.2020 and the suit is filed to

protect the possession over the suit shop. The landlord has issued legal

notice to the tenant for recovery of rent and asking the tenant to vacate

the suit shops. The trial Court therefore, was of the view that the

landlord has to follow due process of law before evicting the tenant.

Therefore, the trial Court granted injunction in favour of the tenant.

Bhagyawant Punde

{4}

939-WP-1748-2022

7.

Being aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Court the

landlord filed M.C.A. No. 04/2021 which is allowed by the appellate

Court holding that, after lapse of last date of the agreement i.e.

30.10.2020, the possession of the tenant become wrongful possession

against the true owner. The tenant is defaulter in payment of rent and

therefore, the tenant has committed wrong and she cannot take benefit

of her own wrong. Hence, the tenant has failed to make out a prima

facie case in her favour. The tenant is aggrieved by this order.

8.

Admittedly, the suit shops are in possession of the tenant

since 2009 till 30.10.2020 on the basis of rent agreements of 11

months. Now the landlord has asked the tenant to vacate the said suit

shops vide notice dated 03.10.2020 and also has sought ren