Rajan Anantprasad Sharma v. Sheikh Mohammed Ayaaz, Constituted Attorney Of Res. No.2 To 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.298 OF 2021 Rajan Anantprasad Sharma

...Petitioner

Versus

Sheikh Mohammed Ayaaz and Ors.

...Respondents

...

Ms Veena Thadani for the Petitioner.

Mr. Dharmesh Vyas with Ms Krusha Dedhia for Respondent No.1. CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

DATED : 5th DECEMBER, 2022.

P. C. :- 1.

The Petitioner has filed this contempt petition for non compliance of Clauses 6, 7, 8, 9 and 14 of the Consent Terms dated 05/02/2016 filed in Appeal from Order (stamp) No.33873 of 2015. 2.

Grievance of the Petitioner is that under the said terms Respondent -landlord was required to demolish and reconstruct the building on the same plot and provide to the tenant a commercial premises in the newly constructed building admeasuring 576 sq.ft. (carpet area) in lieu of the tenanted premises of the tenant. The landlord was also to obtain IOD within a period of six months from the date of receiving vacant possession from the tenant. Clause 8 pertains 1/3

to the rent payable to the tenant toward alternate accommodation. Under Clause 9 the landlord was required to execute individual agreement in respect of Permanent Alternate Accommodation to be allotted to the tenant on permanent basis whereas under Clause 14 the landlord was required to construct the building with floor height of 13 ft 9 inches with loft /mezzanine with an approximate area of 450 sq.ft. as per the prevailing DCR.

3.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner concedes that the building has been demolished and reconstructed. She states that the grievance of the Petitioner is restricted to non-compliance of Clause 14 of the consent terms, which relates to providing loft/mezzanine with area of 450 sq.ft.

4.

Learned counsel for the Respondent-landlord submits that the building has been reconstructed and that the Petitioner herein had delayed the allotment. He has placed on record copy of letter dated 25/11/2021, whereunder the Petitioner herein has requested the landlord to amend the plans and further stated that he would not be executing the agreement for Permanent Alternate Accommodation unless the plans are amended. Learned counsel for the Respondent 2/3

states that the landlord has complied with Clause 14 and that the Permanent Alternate Accommodation, which is to be allotted to the Petitioner herein is located to the eastern corner of the building and that the same has floor height of 13.9 ft. He further submits that the landlord shall handover to the Petitioner an area of 576 sq.ft. as stipulated in Clause 6 as well as loft/mezzanine with an approximate area of 450 sq.ft. as stipulated in Clause 14 as per the prevailing DCR. He further states that the landlord has paid the rent and has complied with clause 8 of the consent terms.

5.

In the light of the said statement, there is no violation or breach of the consent terms and hence the petition is liable to be dismissed. Even otherwise the Petitioner is at liberty to execute the order by taking appropriate proceedings.

6.

Under the circumstances, the petition is dismissed. (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) by MEGHA S PARAB Date:

2022.12.06 19:42:22 +0530 3/3 MEGHA S PARAB