SHANTABEN HARILAL BRAHMBHATT Vs. HASMUKHLAL MANEKLAL CHOKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .This is a revision under Sec. 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 at the instance of the petitioner-tenant original defendant, who was sued by the respondent plaintiff-landlord for a decree of eviction under the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act.

(2.) . The landlord had filed a suit for eviction of the tenant on the ground that the tenant was in arrears of rent for more than six months, that he had failed to comply with the demand made in the statutory notice issued under Sec. 12(2) of the Bombay Rent Act, and that therefore, the landlord is entitled to a decree of eviction.

(3.) . The defendant-tenant contested the suit and also raised a contention in the written statement as to standard rent. It was also contended by the defendant-tenant that the suit notice is illegal, and therefore, the suit is not maintainable. The trial Court, after appreciating the evidence on record, dismissed the suit of the landlord dealing with the various aspects of the matter. The only aspect which is relevant for the purpose of the present revision is that the trial Court also found that the notice is illegal, since the same does not meet with the requirements of Sec. 12(2) of the Bombay Rent Act. The trial Court also found on the facts proved on record that the tenant was ready and willing to pay the contractual rent, which is also the standard rent.