Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court addressed special leave petitions filed by tenants aggrieved by judgments of the Bombay High Court in writ petitions concerning premises occupation. During proceedings, petitioners in SLP No. 4428/2016 sought withdrawal due to subsequent developments: the development agreement with respondent No. 5 was terminated on 08.10.2018, and a fresh agreement was executed with a new developer. The petitioners argued the cause no longer survived against respondent No. 5. Other petitioners in SLP No. 4922/2016 did not dispute this but requested a copy of the fresh agreement and liberty to challenge it if terms were unacceptable. Respondent No. 5 opposed withdrawal but sought liberty to challenge the termination and perjury applications. The court considered these submissions and permitted unconditional withdrawal of SLP No. 4428/2016, dismissing it for petitioner No. 4 due to non-appearance. For SLP No. 4922/2016, the court disposed of it by directing the management to furnish the fresh agreement copy to tenants and reserving liberty for tenants and respondent No. 5 to challenge the agreement or termination before appropriate forums, with grounds to be considered on merits. The decision was based on procedural fairness and the changed circumstances, ensuring parties could pursue remedies elsewhere without prejudice.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Special Leave Petitions - Withdrawal and Disposal - Supreme Court Rules - Petitioners sought withdrawal of SLPs due to termination of development agreement and execution of fresh agreement - Court permitted withdrawal of SLP No. 4428/2016 unconditionally and dismissed it qua petitioner No. 4 - Held that subsequent developments rendered cause non-surviving against respondent No. 5 (Paras 3.1, 4, 5, 6) B) Property Law - Development Agreements - Termination and Fresh Agreements - Not mentioned - Respondent No. 5's development agreement terminated on 08.10.2018 and fresh agreement executed with new developer - Court noted termination and fresh agreement, directed management to furnish copy to tenants - Held that tenants and respondent No. 5 could challenge fresh agreement/termination before appropriate forum (Paras 3.1, 5) C) Civil Procedure - Liberty to Challenge - Reservation of Rights - Not mentioned - Petitioners sought liberty to challenge fresh development agreement if not agreeable to terms - Respondent No. 5 sought liberty to challenge termination and perjury applications - Court reserved liberty for both parties to approach appropriate forums - Held that challenges would be considered on merits in accordance with law (Paras 3.2, 3.3, 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether to permit withdrawal of special leave petitions in view of subsequent developments including termination of development agreement and execution of fresh agreement
Final Decision
Permitted withdrawal of SLP No. 4428/2016 unconditionally; dismissed SLP No. 4428/2016 qua petitioner No. 4; disposed of SLP No. 4922/2016 with directions to furnish copy of fresh development agreement to tenants and reserved liberty for tenants and respondent No. 5 to challenge before appropriate forums
Law Points
- Withdrawal of special leave petitions
- termination of development agreements
- liberty to challenge fresh agreements
- procedural disposal based on subsequent developments
