The Mobile Store Ltd. v. Mr. Satish Chimanlal And ANR.

KVM 1/2 1 - WP 8575 OF 2013.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR Date: 2024.01.10 14:45:02 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO. 8575 OF 2013 The Mobile Store Limited ..... Petitioner

VERSUS

Satish Chimanlal & Anr.

..... Respondents None for the Petitioner.

None for the Respondents.

CORAM: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 8 JANUARY, 2024 P.C. :- The present writ petition challenges the order dated 15 February, 2013 passed in the Revision Application No. 11 of 2010 by the Court of Small Causes at Bandra.

2.

The petitioner is in possession of the Shop No. 1, admeasuring about 400 sq.ft. pursuant to the leave and licence agreement dated 11 September, 2006. The respondent filed an eviction suit in the year 2008 before the Small Causes Court at Bandra, Mumbai. So also, the respondent preferred an application for directions to the petitioner to deposit the arrears

KVM 2/2 1 - WP 8575 OF 2013.doc of compensation and mesne profit.

3.

By an order dated 10 September, 2009, the Small Causes Court directed the petitioner to deposit the arrears of licence fees and the municipal taxes. The petitioner preferred revision before the Division Bench of the Court of Small Causes. The revision application of the petitioner was partly allowed and the order passed by the Single Judge of the Small Causes Court was modified. Against the said modification, the present writ petition has been filed.

4.

Today, nobody appeared for the petitioner when the matter was called out. Even on 4 January, 2024 and 13 December, 2023 nobody appeared for the petitioner. Today even on the second call, nobody appeared for the petitioner. The petitioner is not interested in pursuing the writ petition.

5.

Writ petition is dismissed for default.

[RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]