LAWS(KAR)-1958-6-7

SHRINIVAS ANNAPPA Vs. MANAGER DHONDOBA BALKRISHNAPPA

Decided On June 27, 1958
SHRINIVAS ANNAPPA Appellant
V/S
MANAGER, DHONDOBA BALKRISHNAPPA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent, who is the landlord, sued the petitioner, the tenant, for eviction under the provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Bates Control Act of 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on several grounds, one of which is non-payment of rent. The trial court rejected all the contentions of the respondent and dismissed the suit.

(2.) The respondent appealed to the District Court of North Kanara against the dismissal of his suit under Section 29 of the Act. At the hearing of the ap- peal the petitioner, though served with notice, did not appear. The counsel for the plaintiff-appellant pressed the claim for possession only on one ground, viz. non-payment of rent, and that was the only point considered and determined on appeal. The appellate authority held that the tenant was in arrears and taking the view that the plaintiff was entitled to the benefit of Section 12(3)(a) of the Act ordered eviction. The tenant, against whom this order has been made, has filed this Civil Revision Petition before this Court because that is the only remedy available to him in view of the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 29, according to which no further appeal shall lie against any decision in appeal under Sub-section (1) of the same section. The revision is, therefore, under the provisions of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) The arguments in the revision petition before me centre round the applicability of the provisions of Section 12 of the Act to the proved facts in the case. It will, therefore, he useful to set out the relevant provisions of the Section itself before proceeding to discuss the arguments. The first three sub-section of Section 12, which are of material importance, are as follows :-