VAZIRBOO Vs. KESHAVLAL NARSHIDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two petitions arise out of the same order of the Court of first instance and raise an interesting question of law for decision.

(2.) ONE Kurban Hussein Rahamatalli owned a building called Tayeb Building' at Nagdevi Cross Lane, Bombay. Shop premises in that building were let out by him to a firm doing business under the name and style of Messrs. Keshaylal Narsidas. The agreed rent of the premises was Rs. 245. 54 per month. As the firm fell in arrears of rent, Kurban Hussein gave notice to it on 16-11-1961 demanding the arrears of rent from 1-11-1959 and purporting to terminate the tenancy on the ground of non-payment of rent. To that notice Kurban Hussein received a reply dated 15-1-1962 wherein the firm asked for time to pay the arrears. No payment was, however, made even thereafter and on 15-2-1962 Kurban Hussein filed the suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent, leading to the present petitions.

(3.) IN answer to the summons of the suit one Ramanlal Shah claiming to be the sole proprietor of the concern, put in appearance on behalf of the firm and filed his written, statement on 26-7-1962. He did not raise any contention regarding standard rent or regarding the amount of arrears claimed in the suit but stated that the rent had remained in arrears on account of some dispute with the landlord about repairs to the premises and that he was ready and willing to pay the same. He contended that the firm had been, dissolved and all the former partners were therefore, necessary parties to the suit.