SHIRAZ AHAMAD S/O MUMTAZ Vs. RASHID KHAN S/O YUSUF KHAN
LAWS(BOM)-2017-11-29
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: AURANGABAD)
Decided on November 03,2017

Shri. Shiraz Ahamad S/O Mumtaz ... Appellant
VERSUS
Shri. Rashid Khan S/O Yusufkhan ... Respondents

JUDGEMENT

G.S.PATEL,J. - (1.) The petition was admitted on 13th January 1997. The petitioner is the original defendant/tenant. The respondent is the landlord. The premises in question is Room No. 8, Municipal House No. 421 at Nagaon, Bhiwandi. The plaintiff/respondent filed Regular Civil Suit No. 340 of 1984 against the petitioner/defendant before the Civil Judge Junior Division, Bhiwandi seeking possession on the ground of unpaid arrears of rent. The defendant contested the suit. He filed a written statement and, within one month, the statutory period provided, also filed an application for fixation of standard rent. This was done within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice. The Trial Court framed issues and considered the evidence. After an elaborate judgment on 28th April 1989, it partly decreed the suit for the claim of arrears of rent and permitted increases for the period 1st April 1983 to 31st March 1984. It also fixed the standard rent at Rs 30/- per month plus permitted increases at Rs 4/- per month. However, it dismissed the suit to the extent of the claim for possession.
(2.) The landlord appealed, and by its impugned order dated 11th October 1996 the Appeal Court reversed the Trial Court. It allowed the appeal and directed delivery of possession to the plaintiff/ respondent within two months.
(3.) In my view and having carefully considered the material on record, the impugned order of the Appeal Court cannot be sustained. On the material before it, it was not possible for the Appeal Court to arrive at a conclusion that it did, viz., that because "the defendant did not pay the rent regularly as and when accrued, but paid the same after the intervals of 3 to 4 months", therefore there was sufficient ground to pass a decree of eviction. The Appeal Court also said that the irregularity in payment was material but the plaintiff's acceptance of the rent at these irregular intervals was completely inconsequential. That cannot be.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.