k 1/3 19 sa 139.18 as.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.139 OF 2018 Puvil Karunakaran Sunilkumar ....Appellant V/S Municipal Council Alibag & Anr. ....Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.288 OF 2016 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.139 OF 2018 Puvil Karunakaran Sunilkumar ....Applicant V/S Municipal Council Alibag & Anr. ....Respondents _________ Mr. Kunal Bhanage with Mr. Akshay Pawar for the Appellant/Applicant. Mr. C.G. Gavnekar with Mr. Ashutosh Gavnekar and Mr. Rohit Parab for Respondent No.1-Municipal Council. __________ CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 11 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C.: 1. The Appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 27 November 2015 passed by the District Court-4, Alibag, allowing Regular Civil Appeal No.159 of 2008 filed by Defendant No.1-Municipal Council and setting aside the judgment and order dated 14 July 2008 passed by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Alibag in Regular Civil Suit No.17 of 2004. The Trial Court had decreed the suit and while declaring that Appellant/Plaintiff is licensee of Defendant No.2 in respect of suit shop, katkam Page No. 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AS:37579 k 2/3 19 sa 139.18 as.doc had granted injunction against both the Defendants from dispossessing the Plaintiff from the suit shop. 2. I have heard Mr. Bhanage, the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant and Mr. Gavnekar, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1-Municipal Council. 3. The suit shop was apparently allotted by Respondent No.1- Municipal Council to Defendant No.2. It is Plaintiff’s case that he was inducted into the suit shop as a licensee by Defendant No.2. Accordingly, Plaintiff filed suit seeking a declaration that he is a licensee of Defendant No.2 and on that account Defendant No.1 should be restrained from dispossessing him from without following due process of law. The frame of the suit in my view itself was faulty. In the suit, Plaintiff did not claim any privity of contract with the Municipal Council. He claimed status as licensee of Defendant No.2 who was the allottee of the suit shop through Defendant No.1-Municipal Council. It is difficult to comprehend as to why any Court would ever grant injunction against Defendant No.1-Municipal Council after declaring that Plaintiff is the licensee of Defendant No.2. Even if it was to be held that Plaintiff is the licensee of Defendant No.2 the same would still not stop Municipal Council from taking action against the Plaintiff. To secure injunction against Municipal Council, it was necessary to plead and pray for a declaration that Plaintiff is the authorized occupant of the suit shop. 4. Mr. Bhanage submits that settled position of the Plaintiff is proved in the present case. However, the declaration sought for by the Plaintiff katkam Page No. 2 of 3 k 3/3 19 sa 139.18 as.doc in the suit was in the capacity of licensee of Defendant No.2. The claim of being a licensee demolishes the claim of being in settled possession. The licensee never possesses the premises or property. He or she merely has an authority to enter upon the premises and the legal possession always remains with the licensor. 5. In my view therefore, the First Appellate Court has rightly reversed erroneous findings recorded by the Trial Court. There is no warrant for interference in the impugned decree of the First Appellate Court. No substantial question of law is involved in the Appeal. Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 6. After the order is pronounced, Mr. Bhanage prays for continuation of ad-interim relief granted on 16 February 2016. The request is opposed by Mr. Gavnekar. Pendency of litigation has already permitted Petitioner to occupy the suit shop for the last 22 long years. Time has come for the Appellant to vacate the suit shop. The prayer for continuation of interim order is accordingly rejected. 7. In view of disposal of the Second Appeal, nothing would survive in the Interim Application and the same is also accordingly disposed of. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) katkam Page No. 3 of 3 Signed by: Sudarshan R. Katkam Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 11/09/2026 19:40:06