MAJI BI Vs. F MOHAMMED IBRAHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by the landlord under S.50 of the Mysore Rent Control Act, 1961. It is directed against an order made on IA.No.I by the Prl. Munsiff, Civil Station, Bangalore, in HRC.No.27 of 1989. IA.'No.I is an application filed by the landlord for an order under S.29(4) of that Act.

(2.) The case of the landlord is that the dues on account of the light and water charges had not been paid and such dues are really part of the rent payable for the use and occupation of the premises. The learned Munsiff rejected this contention and dismissed the application. On behalf of the petitioner, Sri S. M. Sait, the learned Advocate, contended that having regard to the relevant clauses of the lease deed and the meaning assigned to the word 'rent', in the context, of a similar Rent Art, by the Supreme Court in the decision of Karnani Properties Ltd. v. Miss Augustine, AIR. 1967 SC. 309. the charges claimed on account of water and electricity must be construed as rent within the meaning of S.29 of the Rent Control Act.

(3.) On behalf of the respondent, Sri Mahboob Ali Khan, the learned Counsel, submitted that the decision in Karnani's case(1) would not be of any assistance to the petitioner, as it would be clear therefrom, that it is nowhere laid down therein that the charges payable to the local authorities, concerned with the supply of water and electricity, would amount to rent payable to a landlord for the use and occupation of a premises let out. He also submitted that the said decision was clearly distinguishable. He further contended that the arrears relative to such charges have been treated by the landlord himself as distinct and separate from rent in that arrears of charges relate to a period prior to the year 1968 whereas arrears of rent claimed in the petition relate to a period subsequent to 11-1-1971.