SARASWATHI Vs. MUNSIFF CHOWGHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As these petitions raise the question as to the scope and ambit of S.73 of Act 1 of 1964, they have been referred to a Division Bench. Mr. Justice P. T. Raman Nayar has held in Krishna Menon v. Kasiviswanatha Varma Raja 1966 KLT 873 , that

(2.) We find it only necessary to observe, that the enquiry contemplated by sub-section (5) of S.73 is upon a motion by the tenant for reasonable time being allowed to him, to make good the deficiency in the amount of the deposit, as having resulted from a bona fide error in the computation of the amount when the rent is payable in kind; upon such a motion for allowing reasonable time, the court has to come to the conclusion that the deficiency was due to a bona fide error of the above description. This has nothing to do with the adjudication of the sufficiency or otherwise of the deposit made by the tenant under S.73. We also feel that for coming to our conclusion, it is not necessary to draw on the analogy with S.83 of the Transfer of Property Act. Accordingly we quash Exts. P-4 and P-4(a), the orders impugned in O. P. 2135 of 1965 and set aside the order sought to be revised in C. R. P. 722 of 1965. The O. P. and the C. R. P. are disposed of as above. No costs.