IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 5812 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 5812 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 5812 OF 2008. Jamshedji Ratanji Nazir & Ors. ..Petitioners. V/s. The Board of Trustees of the Port of Mumbai & Ors ..Respondents. Mr P. Dhakephalkar a/w Ms F. Sethna & Ms D. Das i/b Dunmorr Sett, Advocates for the Petitioners. Mr U. J. Makhija with A. Khandhar i/b Mulla & Mulla for the Respondent No.1. Mr R.M. Vasudeo, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 22.08.2008. DATED: 22.08.2008. DATED: 22.08.2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the petition. 2. This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 1.7.2008 passed by the Bombay City Civil Court in exercise of appellate powers under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 ("the Act" for short). 3. The factual matrix reveal that the present Petitioners were inducted as tenants in the suit premises. The other occupants occupying part of the premises were treated as sub-tenants. The Petitioners have been exercising their right of recovering rent from the sub-tenants. 4. The submission of the petitioners is that, under Section 7 (2) of the Act, so far as damages are concerned, the other occupants; namely, sub-tenants or sub-lessees of the premises shall have to share amount of damages or mesne profit as the case may be, as such their presence in the proceedings in hand is necessary and that they need to be joined as proper parties to the proceedings. Submission is misplaced. 5. If one turns to the scheme of the Act, in general, and sub-Section (1) of Section 7 in particular, it refers to arrears of rent. So long as the tenant’s occupation does not become unauthorised, he is liable to pay rent. Sub-Section (1) of Section 7 provides for recovery of rent, if a tenant is in arrears. 6. Once the tenancy of a tenant is terminated, then the occupation of the occupant of the premises becomes unauthorised. The unauthorised occupant is required to pay damages or mesne profit for the period of his unauthorised occupation. If the amount of damages is in arrears, then the legislative mechanism is provided in sub-Section (2) of Section 7 of the Act to recover the arrears of damages. 7. On the above backdrop, the scheme of the Act saddles this liability of paying damages on the tenants i.e. head tenant and not the sub-tenants. It is, therefore, not necessary that sub-tenants should be party to the eviction proceedings, just to share the amount of damages or mesne profits. Submission made in this behalf as held hereinabove, cannot be accepted. 8. In the above view of the matter, only the head tenant or main lessee is the necessary party to the proceeding and not the sub-tenants or sub-lessees. The view taken by the Courts below is a reasonable and possible view. No perversity could be demonstrated in the impugned order so as to exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the impugned order. 9. In the result, the petition is dismissed in limini with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)