WP. 1716-93 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 1716 OF 1993 . Wali Mohammad Haji Usman Kaladia ) (since deceased, represented through LRs. ) 1. Zulekha Wali Mohammad Kaladia, ) Aged about 61 years. ) 2. Sali Wali Mohammed Kaladia, ) Aged about 27 years. ) 3. Yunnus Wali Mohammad Kaladia, ) 4. Irfan Wali Mohammad Kaladia, ) Aged about 23 years. ) All residing at village Monor, Taluka - ) Palghar, District Thane. ...Petitioners Vs. Arif Siddique Shaikh (since deceased ) represented through the LRs. ) 1a. Smt. Surayia wife of Arif Siddique Shaikh ) Aged 50 years, Occu.- Housewife. ) 1b. Ms. Seema daughter of Arif Siddique Shaikh Age 32 years, Occu.- not known ) 1c. Mr. Asim s/o Arif Siddique Shaikh, ) Aged 30 years, Occu. - Service, ) 1d. Ms. Bebinaz d/o Arif Siddique Shaikh ) Aged 26 years, Occu.- not known ) WP. 1716-93 - 2 - 1e. Mr. Wasim s/o Arif Siddique Shaikh, ) Aged 23 years, Occu.- Service, ) 1f. Ms. Makshuda d/o Arif Siddique Shaikh ) Aged 20 years, Occu.- not known ) 1g. Mr. Zishan s/o Arif Siddique Shaikh ) Aged 14 years, Occu.- Student ) (Through his mother & natural guardian ) Smt. Surayia Arif Siddique Shaikh) ) All residing at House No. 156, Masjid Road) Monor, Taluka Palghar, Thane ...Respondents *** None for the Petitioners. Mr. A. N. Mulla & D. M. Patil for the respondents. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : MARCH 28, 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. None appears for the petitioners. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Once the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution and thereafter it was restored to the file. Plaintiff is the original landlord. He had filed the suit against the respondents herein for eviction from the suit premises on the ground that he had constructed wooden pendal on the suit premises and therefore, erected a permanent structure within the meaning of Section 13(1)(b) of the Bombay Rent Act. The trial Court decreed the suit. Against the said order, the tenant WP. 1716-93 - 3 - preferred an appeal before the lower Appellate Court. The lower Appellate Court after going through the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that construction of wooden pandal on the suit property would not amount to construction of a permanent structure. The lower Appellate Court has given cogent reasons while coming to the conclusion after going through the evidence on record, and therefore, on this ground, the Appeal was allowed with costs and judgment & decree of the trial Court was set aside. In my view cogent reasons were given by the lower Appellate Court and no case is made out for interference with the impugned judgment & order while exercising the jurisdiction under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. [ V. M. KANADE J.]