MRANALINI B SHAH Vs. BAPALAL MOHANLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by special leave raises a question with regard to the interpretation of Section 12 (3) (b) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act No. LVII of 1947, which runs as follows :

(2.) IT is not disputed that the expression "suit" in the aforesaid clause (b) includes an "appeal". The principal question that falls for consideration is, whether the requirement of the latter part of the above-quoted Clause regarding payment or tender of rent and permitted increases, regularly, during the pendency of the suit appeal is mandatory or merely directory. In other words, whether in case of a monthly tenancy, the Court has a discretion to treat the payment or tender of rent made at intervals ranging from two to four months during the pendency of the suit/appeal as a regular payment or tender within the contemplation of Clause (b) of Section 12 (3) ?

(3.) AGGRIEVED by that decree, the land-lord preferred an appeal before the Appellate Bench of the Small Cause Court at Ahmedabad, which by its judgment dated 7/01/1977, dismissed the appeal and maintained the decree of the trial Judge. The landlord thereafter filed a writ petition in the High Court, which was summarily dismissed by an Order dated 21/07/1977.