Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Punjab National Bank, Thr. Its Manager, ... vs Lalit S/O Ratanlalji Nimodia on 13 October, 2022

Author: Avinash G. Gharote

Bench: Avinash G. Gharote

                                                   1                                      29.WP.1591-2022.odt




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                            WRIT PETITION NO. 1591 OF 2022
          ( Punjab National Bank, Thr. Its Manager, Yavatmal & Anr.
                                      Vs.
                       Dr. Lalit S/o Ratanlalji Nimodia )

Office Notes, Office Memoranda                          Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders     or    directions and
Registrar's orders


                                  Mr. Milind Y. Wadodkar, Advocate for the Petitioners.
                                  Ms. Shaad Firdos Mirza, Advocate for the Respondent.



                                  CORAM:        AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATED : 13th OCTOBER, 2022.

Heard Mr. Wadodakar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Mirza, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The petition challenges the order dated 20.11.2021 (page 30), passed under Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, as applicable to the State of Maharashtra by the Bombay amendment, wherein by way of an interim order the petitioners/tenants have been directed to pay damages of Rs. 7,000/- per day from 01.04.2018 towards the damages/mesne profit under Order XV-A(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, until further orders.

3. It is contended, that the language of Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, does not permit the learned Trial Court, to have awarded the damages during 2 29.WP.1591-2022.odt the pendency of the suit between the landlord and tenants, and therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained and it required to be quashed and set aside. Reliance is placed upon Bharat Petroleum Corporation Vs. Mr. Thakorbhai Ranchhodji Desai, 2003(6) Bom.CR 337 para 14.

4. Ms. Mirza, learned counsel for the respondent submits, that since Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, contemplates a suit for eviction, with or without arrears of rent or licence fees or further mesne profit, it was permissible for the learned Trial Court to have awarded recovery of damages.

5. A perusal of Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure indicates, that what can be claimed by the plaintiff by invoking the said provision, is a direction against the defendant/tenant to deposit in each succeeding month, the rent or the licence fee claimed in a suit. The provisions of Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, do not contemplate the quantification of any damages for use and occupation of the premises nor do they confer any jurisdiction upon the Court to award them during the pendency of the suit.

6. The impugned order indicates, that what has been awarded, are damages of Rs. 7,000/- per day for use and occupation of the premises in occupation against the tenant by invoking the provisions of Order XV-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, which clearly is not permissible. In Bharat Petroleum Corporation (Supra), 3 29.WP.1591-2022.odt this Court has held that what can be ordered to be paid under the aforesaid provisions of law are specifically described there under and those powers do not include power to order payment of damages during the pendency of a suit between the landlord and tenant on the claim that the tenancy is terminated and therefore, the landlord is entitled for eviction of the tenant. The impugned order therefore is totally without any jurisdiction and is hereby quashed and set aside and the application at Exh. 18 is dismissed.

7. The Petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.

JUDGE SD. Bhimte Signed By:SHRIKANT DAMODHAR BHIMTE Signing Date:14.10.2022 14:43