Advani and Society appealed therefrom to the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court, Bombay in Appeal No.
By an agreement of leave and licence dated 11.6.1969 entered into between the appellant and Advani, the appellant took exclusive possession of the flat.
989/5305 of 1972 in the Court of Small Causes, Bombay on 10.11.1972 seeking a declaration that he was the tenant of the flat, with an interim application for stay of the proceeding till the disposal of his application for fixation of standard rent but that application was rejected and the appellant was thereafter unsuccessful in the High Court which was dismissed on 7.9.1977.
The appellant instead of vacating the flat filed an application in the Court of Small Causes, Bombay on 13.3.1972 for fixation of its standard rent.
1,000 Rupees one thousand on 10.6.1969.
By letter dated 22.1.1972 Advani purported to terminate the licence with effect from 10.3.1972 and asked the appellant to vacate the flat and the appellant having number acceded to the request, Advani informed the Society, which, vide letter dated 22.2.1972 required the appellant to vacate the flat and to deliver possession thereof to Advani on or before the 10th March, 1972.
397 of 1985 which was allowed and the impugned Judgment of the IInd Cooperative Court was set aside on 31.7.1986.
The appellant impugned the appellate order in Writ petition No.
From the Judgment and Order dated 24.4.1989 of the Bombay High Court in W.P.No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
S. Guru Raja Rao, S. Markandeya and Ms. C. Markandeya, for the Appellant.
A. Kriplani and S.K. Jain for the Respondents.
In April 1972, Advani and the Society raised a dispute under section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act to recover possession from the appellant who in turn filed declaratory suit No.
4118 of 1986 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, companytending, inter alia, that the agreement between the appellant and Advani, though styled as a leave and licence, was a lease that section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 was number attracted and companyld number have been invoked by Advani and the Society and that section 91 itself was ultra vires the Article 14 of the Constitution of India to the extent it tried to reach persons who were number members of companyperative societies.
24, Block No.
The learned Judge of the IInd Cooperative Court, Greater Bombay by his Judgment dated 6.3.1985 dismissed the suit holding that the appellant was a licensee and number a tenant, but the Society was an idle party and had acted in companylusion with Advani to vacate the appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by N. SAIKIA, J. This appeal by special leave is from the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Bombay dated 24.4.1989 in Writ Petition No.
1,second floor, Nanik Niwas, situate at Bhulabhai Desai Road, Bombay for short, the flat on a monthly rent of Rs.
2846 of 1989.
4118 of 1986.
By an application dated 10.6.1969, Advani obtained permission of the Society to induct the appellant temporarily into his flat and accordingly, the appellant took on rent from Advani flat No.
The agreement was for a period of 11 months and was renewable for 2 further periods of 11 months each.
Vide Resolution No.
The second respondent Shyam Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. was a tenant companypartnership companyperative society for short, the Society and Panjumal H. Advani late father of the first respondent for short, Advani was its tenant companypartner member.
208 dated 13.6.1969, the Managing Committee of the Society granted the permission.
4118 of 1986 dismissing the petition.
On the same date the appellant, under the Societys rules, applied for its numberinal membership stating, inter alia, that he intended to take the flat for temporary use and occupation that he would number claim any right of permanent nature and that he would vacate the flat on receipt of numberice thereof.
