FRANCIS JERONE FERNANDIS Vs. ANTHONY PEDAD CARDOZA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant in O. S. No. 40/1972 on the file of the I Additional Munsiff, Karwar, is the appellant and the plaintiff is the respondent in this appeal.

(2.) The plaintiff brought the suit O. S. No. 40/1972 against the defendant for recovery of possession of the suit premises and arrears of rent together with future mesne profits. The suit was based on the allegations that the defendant has taken the suit premises on lease from the plaintiff agreeing to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 5/-. The defendant has paid the rents at the rate of Rs. 5/- p.m. for some time. Later he failed to pay the rent as agreed. Hench the plaintiff caused a lawyers' notice dt. 28-3-1972 to be issued to the defendant terminating his tenancy. The said notice was served on the defendant on 29-3-1972. In the said notice, the plaintiff also called upon the defendant to pay all the arrears of rent and also to deliver vacant possession of the premises in question. Since the defendant neither paid the arrears nor handed over possession of .the suit premises, the plaintiff brought the suit for the reliefs stated above.

(3.) The defendant resisted the suit on several grounds. He admitted that he is a tenant under the plaintiff since 1955 and he has been paying the rent as agreed to.' He denied having kept the rent in. arrears. He says that he is manufacturing copper vessels in his shop and also sells them and he also does smithy work in the premises. The plaintiff has accepted the rent after he issued the quit notice and thus he waived the quit notice. Besides, the quit notice is illegal and void and not binding upon him. He also pleaded that greater hardship will be caused to him if he is ousted from the suit premises. The plaintiff wants to increase the rent and so he came forward with the present suit. Finally he prayed for the dismissal of the suit on these grounds.