SHAH DHANSUKHIAL CHHAGANLAL Vs. DALICHAND VIRCHAND SHROFF DEAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following judgment of the court was delivered by

(2.) THIS is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the High court of Gujarat passed in a Civil Revision Application arising out of a suit filed by the plaintiff respondent against the defendant-appellant to recover possession of certain premises situate in Surat.

(3.) IN revision three contentions were. raised before the High court, namely, (1) as to the validity of the notice of ejectment; (2) whether s. 12(3)(a) or 12(3)(b) of the Act applied; and(3) whether the defendant was entitled to protection under s. 12(1) of the Act. The High court held that it was not open to the tenant to raise the question of the validity of the notice in a revision application. Moreover, there was no substance in it as the compromise petition expressly recorded that the tenancy in terms of it should commence on 1/09/1952. With regard to the second question the High court held that `it was common ground between the parties before the Assistant Judge that the case of the defendant fell within section 12(3) (b) of the Rent Act.` The learned Judge of the High court noted: (a) The trial Judge turned down the applicability of s. 12(3) (a) of the Act holding that the defendant had disputed the municipal taxes and permitted increases; (b) The, conditions under s. 12(3) (b) of the Act were not fulfilled; (c) No contention about the applicability of 12(3) (a) was raised before the Assistant Judge in appeal and he therefore did not go into the question at all; and (d) The conditions necessary for the applicability of s. 12(3)(a) were not present, as besides the amount of Rs. 27.00 mentioned in the compromise petition, the tenant had to pay other sums not due from him every month.