Wp 5402 of 2010 1 SSK/14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5402 OF 2010 M/s. Textile Works Private Limited & Ors. ....Petitioners Versus Life Insurance Corporation of India ...Respondents Mr. V. A. Thorat, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. Biren Saraf, Mr. Vaibhav Sugdare i/b. Mrs. Ambrn Saheed, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Ajit C. Shah a/w. Mr. Akshay A. Shah, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 13TH JULY, 2010. P.C.: Heard Mr.Thorat, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners and Mr.Shah, learned Counsel for the Respondents. 2. The Estate Officer of the Respondents by an order dated 19th April, 2010 ordered the eviction of the Petitioner No.1 on the grounds of sub-letting and non-payment of arrears of rent allegedly amounting to Rs.2,31,363/- with 9% simple interest. The Estate Officer further directed the Petitioners to pay to the Respondents, an amount of Rs.97,37,368.13 paise towards damages. Wp 5402 of 2010 2 3. This order of the Estate Officer was challenged by the Petitioners before the Principal Judge of Bombay City Civil Court. The Petitioners also filed an application for stay. The learned Principal Judge by his order dated 7th May, 2010 admitted the Petitioners’ appeal and the Estate Officer’s Order of eviction also came to be stayed on the condition that the Petitioners shall deposit with Respondent a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- within ten weeks. The Petitioner’s tenancy was terminated by the Respondents by notice dated 1st March, 2004. According to the Respondents, the arrears of the rent as on that day were in the tune of Rs.2,31,636/- . The arrears as claimed by the Respondents were accepted by the Estate Officer and the Petitioners were directed to pay the arrears alongwith interest @9% p.a.. Thus the total amount towards the arrears of the rent comes to about Rs.4,11,430/-. 4. It is the specific contention of Mr.Thorat, learned Senior Counsel that the Petitioners were inducted as tenants in the suit property in the year 1935 and the Respondents-Corporation acquired the building in which the suit premises is situated in the year 1956. The initial rate was Rs.615/-p.m and that was revised subsequently to Rs.2,834/-p.m.. He specifically contended that the arrears of the rent are paid to the Respondents up to date till June, 2010. He relied upon the receipts to substantiate his contention. Be that as it may, even the Respondents subsequent to notice Wp 5402 of 2010 3 of termination of tenancy of the Petitioners asked from the Petitioners arrears of rent @ Rs.615/- p.m.. 5. So far as the issue of damages is concerned, the Estate Officer directed the Petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.97,00,000/- and odd for unauthorised occupation from the date of termination of tenancy of the Petitioners. It is the Petitioner’s contention that the Respondents can take action under Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 subject to satisfying the Court about their need. The Respondents merely by terminating the tenancy cannot take possession of the demised premises. This issue is sub-judice before the Appellate Court and same will be decided after hearing both the parties. In the above facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the amount which the Petitioners are directed to deposit with the Respondents as a condition of stay is excessive. In my opinion the interest of justice will be subserved by passing the following order: 1. As a condition precedent to stay, the Petitioners are directed to deposit an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- with the City Civil Court within a period of three weeks from today. The impugned order stands modified to that extent only. Wp 5402 of 2010 4 2. The above observations are made for the purpose of disposal of this petition and the Appellate Court shall dispose of the Petitioners’ appeal independently on its own merits and as expeditiously as possible. With the above observations, the petition is disposed of. (R. V. MORE, J.)