Bombay High Court
MARIA ALICE DE SOUZA CAIADO E DIAS ALIAS ALICE MARIA DIASversusBALJEET KAUR SONI
- Disposal
- Partly allowed
Holding
The stay order granted by the Principal District Judge is illegal and is set aside.
Summary
The petitioner, Mrs. Maria Alice de Souza Caiado, entered into a leave‑and‑license agreement with the respondent, Mrs. Baljeet Kaur Soni, for a commercial premises. The agreement expired on 28‑02‑2025 and the respondent failed to pay licence fees for over two years. The petitioner obtained an eviction order under Section 40‑A of the Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968, which the Deputy Collector directed to be executed on 12‑12‑2025. The respondent filed a rent‑revision petition and obtained a stay of the eviction order from the Principal District Judge on 07‑01‑2026, but the judge gave no reasons and ignored the requirement under CPC Order XV‑A to deposit arrears. The High Court held that the stay order was unlawful, quashed it, and directed the district judge to reconsider the stay after hearing both parties. The writ petition was partly allowed and the matter was remanded for further hearing.
Issues considered
- Whether the Principal District Judge could grant a blanket stay of the eviction order without recording reasons and without directing the respondent to deposit arrears as required by CPC Order XV‑A.
- Whether the eviction order under Section 40‑A of the Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968, is enforceable despite the stay.
Legislation cited
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. Order XV-A
- Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968 — s. 40-A
Subjects
- Leave and License
- Eviction
- Rent Arrears
- Stay Order
- CPC Order XV-A
- Goa Buildings Act
- Landlord‑Tenant Dispute
Judgment
2026:BHC-GOA:1887
(1) wp-571-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO.571 OF 2026
MRS. MARIA ALICE DE SOUZA CAIADO E DIAS ALIAS ALICE
MARIA DIAS
VERSUS
MRS. BALJEET KAUR SONI
…
Mr. Charles Elton, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Vedraj Toraskar, Advocate for Respondent.
…
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATED : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026.
FINAL ORDER:-
1. The petitioner impugns order dated 07.01.2026 passed by
Principal District Judge, South Goa at Margao in RR/4/2025, thereby
granting stay to execution and implementation of order dated
12.12.2025 passed by Deputy Collector in Case No.SDO-II/SAL/Rent
Control Act/03/2025 directing eviction of respondent licensee.
2. The petitioner and respondent entered into Leave and License
Agreement dated 28.08.2019 for period of 11 months. It was renewed
time to time and lastly it was renewed and registered vide Registration
No.3997/2024 at Margao for period from 01.04.2024 to 28.02.2025 for
license fee of Rs.30,000/- per month.
3. It is contention of petitioner that respondent failed to pay license
fee. Eventually, petitioner forfeited security deposit and issued legal
notice calling upon respondent to vacate premises within 30 days.
(2) wp-571-2026.odt
Thereafter, petitioner filed proceeding for eviction under Section 40-A
of Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968
(hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1968’). Although notice of
proceeding was served upon respondent, she failed to participate in
proceeding. Ultimately, Deputy Collector passed eviction order dated
12.12.2025 directing respondent to vacate premises within period of 30
days and hand over peaceful possession to petitioner. The respondent
was further directed to pay all dues, which are payable to petitioner.
4. Aggrieved respondent preferred Rent Revision No.4/2025 before
Principal District Judge, South Goa alongwith application for stay to
eviction order passed by Deputy Collector and Sub Divisional Officer.
The Principal District Judge passed cryptic order staying execution of
eviction order. Hence, this petition.
5. Heard learned Advocates appearing for respective parties.
Perused record.
6. Admittedly, respondent is in possession of suit premises on the
basis of Leave and License Agreement, which had validity till
28.02.2025. Thereafter, there was no renewal of license agreement. The
suit premises is a commercial property, which is occupied by respondent
till date. The respondent has not paid remuneration even as per terms of
license for more than two years. The learned District Judge failed to
record reasons for grant of blanket stay to order passed by Deputy
(3) wp-571-2026.odt
Collector and Sub Divisional Officer, which includes direction for
payment of dues. Even learned District Judge lost sight of Bombay
Amendment in Order XV-A of Code of Civil Procedure, which requires
in any suit by a lessor or licensor against lessee or licensee for his
eviction with or without arrears of rent or license fee defendant shall
deposit such amount as Court may direct on account of arrears up to the
date of the order and thereafter continue to deposit in each succeeding
month rent or license fee claimed in suit as Court may direct. The
defendant is put to obligation to continue to deposit such amount till
decision of suit. Non-deposit entails striking off defence. In light of
aforesaid factual backdrop, impugned order cannot be sustained in law.
Hence, following order:
ORDER
a. Writ Petition is partly allowed.
b. The impugned order dated 07.01.2026 passed by Principal
District Judge, South Goa at Margao in RR/4/2025 staying order
12.12.2025 passed by Deputy Collector in Case No.SDO-II/SAL/Rent
Control Act/03/2025 is quashed and set aside.
c. The Principal District Judge shall consider respondent’s
application for grant of stay in light of aforesaid observations and
decide same after giving opportunity of hearing to both parties.
(4) wp-571-2026.odt
d. Parties to appear before Principal District Judge, South Goa at
Margao on 08.10.2026 or next date fixed for hearing of Appeal.
(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Devendra/September-2026
Checking your session…