MOHMEDHUSEN HAJI VAFATI Vs. SURFUNISA ABDULMAJID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decree of eviction ordered to be passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad by its judgment and order passed on 31/01/1980 in Appeal No. 30 of 1977 is under challenge in this revisional application preferred by the original tenant before this Court. Thereby the Appellate Court was pleased to accept the appeal of the landlords and to set aside the judgment and the decree passed by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court (Court No. 6) at Ahmedabad on 30/11/1976 in H.R.P. Suit No. 3510 of 1972. Thereby the learned trial Judge was pleased to dismiss the suit of the landlords for possession of the rented Premises-

(2.) The facts giving rise to this revisional application move in a narrow compass. The respondents are the landlords and the petitioner is the tenant in respect of the premises involved in the litigation giving rise to this revisional application. It appears that the tenant was stated to be in possession of two rooms on the monthly rent of Rs. 11 and Rs. 5 for the bigger room and the smaller room respectively. The tenant appears to have fallen in arrears of rent from 1/09/1969. He was therefore served with one demand notice of 8/06/1972. He gave his reply thereto on 16/06/1972. Therein he inter alia contended that the rent claimed in the demand notice was not the standard rent. The landlords thereupon filed one suit in the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad for possession of the rented premises from the tenant on the grounds of arrears of rent for more than six months even after expiration of one month from the date of the demand notice and non-user of the rented premises for six months or more preceding the date of the suit. That suit came to be registered as H. R. P. Suit No. 3510 of 1972. It appears to have been assigned to Court No. 6 of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad for trial and disposal. The tenant filed his written statement at Exh. 15 on the record of the suit and resisted the suit on various grounds. The learned trial Judge raised the necessary issues. After recording evidence and hearing the parties, by his judgment and decree passed on 30/11/1976 in H.R.P. Suit No. 3510 of 1972, the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court (Court No. 6) at Ahmedabad as pleased to dismiss the suit for possession of the rented premises filed by the landlords. The aggrieved landlords carried the matter in appeal before the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad. Their appeal came to be registered as Appeal No. 30 of 1977. By its judgment and order passed on 3 1/01/1980 in Appeal No. 30 of 1977, the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad was pleased to accept the appeal of the landlords and to pass the decree for possession of the rented premises as prayed for by them in the suit. The aggrieved tenant has thereupon invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 ('the Act' for brief) for questioning the correctness of the aforesaid decision of the lower Appellate Court in appeal.

(3.) The Appellate Court found the present petitioner to be in arrears of rent for more than six months even after expiration of one month from the date of service of the demand notice to him. In view of a consent order passed earlier in the tenant's application under Sec. 11(4) of the Act, the Appellate Court took the view that the dispute raised by the tenant about the standard rent in his reply to the demand notice was not a bona fide dispute, and as such the case would not fall outside the purview of Sec. 12(3)(a) thereof. Accordingly, the Appellate Court ordered to pass the decree for possession of the rented premises as prayed for by the landlords in their suit under Sec. 12(3)(a) of the Act.