Smt.Shantaben Bhanushali v. M/s.Kavita Construction Company

Smt. Shantaben Bhanushali ... Applicant v/s M/s.Kavita Construction Company ... Respondent Mr.A.G.Damle i/by J.P.Dubey for the applicant. Mr.R.R.Sharma i/by R.V.Yadav for the respondent. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 7TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C.:

The decree has been passed by the Trial Court evicting the applicant tenant under Section 16(1) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. That decree has been confirmed. It appears that the building has now been redeveloped and the applicant is entitled, according to the respondent, to new premises only as a tenant. According to the respondent, the applicant must enter into tenancy agreement as required under the aforesaid Act. However, it is submitted that Rs. 95,000/- is due and payable by the applicant to the tenant 2 which fact has been recorded by this Court by its order dated

14.10.2009. Accordingly the applicant has deposited Rs. 95,000/- as directed by this Court within the stipulated time. The applicant however contends that, if Rs.95,000/- is due and payable to the respondent, then he must be allotted the premises on ownership basis and not as a tenant.

In my view, the civil revision application need not be entertained in these circumstances.

The applicant shall enter into tenancy agreement within two weeks from today without prejudice to his rights and contention that he is entitled to premises in the reconstructed building on ownership basis.

The amount of Rs.95,000/- which has been deposited in this Court, shall be disbursed to the respondent. However, that will be subject to a standard rent application which the applicant may file before the Small Causes Court.

Civil revision application dismissed. ..... 3