1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1905 OF 2010 Shri Utpal Pramod Desai ...Petitioner vs. 1 Mr.Rizwan Sharif 2 Ld.Competent Authority Konkan Division, Bandra ...Respondents Ms Shweta Sharma for the petitioner None for the respondents CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : MARCH 17, 2010 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The first respondent filed an application under section 24 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act,1999 before the Competent Authority. In the said application the first respondent alleged that the petitioner is the licensee in respect of the suit flat which is more particularly described in the said application and in particular in paragraph 1 thereof. The first respondent has stated in the application that the suit flat is flat no.103 admeasuring 470 sq. ft in Salasar Blue Bell Co-op Housing Society at Mira Road, Thane. The petitioner and the three others have filed a civil suit in the civil Court claiming declaration of ownership in respect of the suit property more particularly described in the said suit. 2 An application was made by the petitioner before the Competent Authority for stay of the proceedings of the application for eviction. The stay was sought in purported exercise of power under section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908. By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected. 2 3 The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the in the suit filed by the petitioner, he is claiming declaration of ownership in respect of the suit flat and if the competent Authority proceeds and passes an order of eviction, the suit will become infructuous. Her submission is that pending the substantive suit in the civil Court, the Competent Authority will have to stay the proceedings of the application for eviction. 4 I have considered the submissions. On the face of it, section 10 of the said Code will have no application in as much as even assuming that the Competent Authority is a Court, the Competent Authority and the Civil Court are not the courts of concurrent jurisdiction. 5 Moreover, in the case of Surendra B. Agarwal & Anr. Vs. Ami Merchandising Pvt.Ltd.(W.P.No.2682 of 2009 decided by this Court on 11 th September 2009), this Court has held that the Competent Authority has no power to stay the proceedings of the application under section 24 of the said Act of 1999 on the ground of pendency of a civil suit on title. In any case, on plain reading of section 10 of the said Code, it will not apply. No case for interference is made out. Writ Petition is rejected. JUDGE 3