PARMANANDBHAI DAHYABHAI BHULA Vs. BHAMIBEN SUBHASHBHAI SONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) XXX XXX XXX

(2.) The facts in brief are that the appellant, original plaintiff, had preferred R.C.S. No.181/1987 against the original defendant for recovery of possession of the suit premises which was given on rent to the original defendant and also for recovery of the outstanding amount of rent. The said suit was decreed in favour of the appellant herein by judgment and decree dated 30.09.1993. Against the said judgment, the original defendant preferred R.C.A. 83/1993 before the District Court, Valsad. The lower appellate Court allowed the appeal by impugned judgment and order dated 11.08.2000. Hence, this revision application.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. In the case on hand, the suit Notice is dated 16.03.1987 and it was produced on record vide Exhibit -18. After appreciating the evidence on record, the lower appellate Court recorded the conclusion that the said Notice does not state the period of arrears of rent, the exact amount of arrears of rent and also the specific demand to pay rent as stated in the said Notice. Thus, it was found that the suit Notice served upon the defendant was not in accordance with the provisions of Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947.