Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 125 (BOM)

Tejraj Bhojraj Joshi v. Dudhkala Bhojraj Joshi

2023-01-09

G.S.KULKARNI

body2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER 1. Not on board. Taken on board on a praecipe being moved on behalf of the petitioner. 2. This Court, on 6/1/2023, had passed the following order:- < WXY>"1. Not on board. Taken on board on a praecipe being moved on behalf of the petitioner. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The petition challenges an order dtd. 7/9/2022 passed by the Presiding Officer, Deputy District Officer, Senior Citizens Tribunal, Mumbai City. By the impugned order, the petitioner who is the son of respondent no.1 has been directed to vacate the premises which are claimed to be the premises of senior citizen (mother)-respondent no.1. The direction as contained in the impugned order is to the effect that the petitioner shall vacate the premises within a period of 120 days from the date of the said order passed by the tribunal. There is also a direction that the petitioner shall make payment of Rs.1, 000.00 to respondent no.1. 4. After the proceedings were heard for some time, the petitioner has taken a fair stand. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall vacate the premises namely "301, IWing, Mahalaxmi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd." on or before 28/2/2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall file an unconditional undertaking to be placed on record of this petition, that the petitioner shall vacate the premises by such time. She states that the petitioner shall also continue to pay Rs.1, 000.00 to respondent no.1. Statement as made on behalf of the petitioner is accepted. 5. In the above circumstances, learned counsel for respondent no.1-mother has also fairly submitted that the grievance of respondent no.1 as canvassed in the proceedings before the Senior Citizens Tribunal would stand redressed in the petitioner vacating the premises and continuing to pay maintenance of Rs.1000.00 per month. 6. In these circumstances, further adjudication of the petition is not called for. It is disposed of in terms of the statement as made on behalf of the petitioner as noted above. 7. Needless to observe that all rights and contentions of the petitioner to assert any claim in respect of the said property based on inheritance are expressly kept open. All contentions of the petitioner in S.C. Suit (Stamp) No.4078 of 2021 and of the defendants therein are expressly kept open. 8. 7. Needless to observe that all rights and contentions of the petitioner to assert any claim in respect of the said property based on inheritance are expressly kept open. All contentions of the petitioner in S.C. Suit (Stamp) No.4078 of 2021 and of the defendants therein are expressly kept open. 8. Let the undertaking of the petitioner be placed on record within one week from today, with a copy of the same to be furnished to the advocate for respondent no.1. 9. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall take all precautions and shall not cause any further inconvenience, harassment whatsoever to respondent no.1. 10. Disposed of in the above terms. No costs."</ WXY> 3. However, it is informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that today the concerned department nonetheless has executed the impugned orders passed by the Senior Citizens Tribunal and has evicted the petitioner, despite this Court having categorically recording a statement on behalf of the petitioner that he would vacate the premises on or before 28/2/2023 and the same was agreed on behalf of the contesting respondent being respondent no.1. 4. It is her submission that the petitioner is evicted with all his belongings who is now standing outside the premises. It clearly appears that such action on the part of official authorities apart from being duly hasty appears to be in breach of the above order passed by this Court. The concerned officers are immediately required to restore the possession of the petitioner who shall abide by the orders passed by this Court on 6/1/2023. 5. It is informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the officers were also in fact informed of the above order passed by this Court on 6/1/2023, and that the order was not available as the same was yet to be loaded. In these circumstances, respondent no.2 shall inquire into the conduct of the concerned officers who have undertaken such hasty action, and make a report to this Court. After going through such report, if it is revealed that there was any intention of the concerned officer to overreach the orders of this Court, further appropriate orders would be passed. 6. Accordingly, to enable respondent no.2 to make a report, stand over to 30/1/2023. 7. Compliance of this order shall be reported to the Court tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. 8. 6. Accordingly, to enable respondent no.2 to make a report, stand over to 30/1/2023. 7. Compliance of this order shall be reported to the Court tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. 8. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.