20 June 2025 Civil Writ Petition >> Civil & Consumer Law  

In Ajit K. Dharia, Senior Citizen, Indian Inhabitant v/s Mumbai Municipal Corporation, Mumbai & Others., the Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a tenant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking several directions against a developer and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC). The petitioner, a tenant of Room No. 3 in "Suman Niwas", sought to quash the Occupancy Certificate (OC) issued to the developer for a new building constructed on the property. Additionally, the petitioner requested the BMC to take possession of a flat reserved by the landlord for him and hand it over, and further sought a directive for the landlord to execute an agreement with him on the same terms and conditions as other tenants.

The Court acknowledged that the rights of tenants during redevelopment are well-protected under laws like Section 499 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, and Section 17 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, as well as recent judgments.

However, the High Court found the petition to be not maintainable. The Court characterized the litigation as akin to "buying a lottery ticket" and a "sophisticated form of extortion" from the landlord or developer, referencing a previous ruling in Khimjibhai Harjivanbhai Patadia v Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. The Court emphasized that a tenant cannot dictate terms to the landlord.

The High Court clarified that while the landlord is indeed obligated to enter into an agreement with the petitioner on the same terms as other tenants, any dispute regarding this is a civil matter. Such a dispute requires a trial before a jurisdictional Civil Court and cannot be decided under the High Court's extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Shalini Shyam Shetty & Anr. v/s. Rajendra Shankar Patil.

Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within four weeks. The judgment specifies the bank details for payment and outlines the procedure for recovery if the costs are not deposited within the stipulated time.