NANASAHEB BHIKHAJI RAO Vs. RAMBHAO ARJUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List has been revised twice, none appeared for the respondents. As such, Shri BJ Shelat, learned counsel for the revisionist has been heard and the judgments of the courts below have been examined.

(2.) The revisionist, landlord filed a suit for eviction of the tenant-in-chief, respondent no.1 and also the sub-tenants, respondent nos.2 and 3 on various grounds. The first ground was that, the tenant was in arrears of rent exceeding six months. The second ground was that, the respondent no.1, tenant had illegally sub-let the suit land to the respondent nos.2 and 3 without his consent in writing. The third ground was that, the land in suit was reasonably and bonafidely required by the landlord, revisionist for his personal use. The next ground was that, the sub-tenants, respondent nos.2 and 3 were creating nuisance on the suit land. Another ground was that, the tenant-in-chief, as well as, the sub-tenants are using the suit land for purpose which is contrary to the terms of contract between the tenant and the landlord contained in the rent note and there has been change of u/ser of the suit land.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the tenant-in-chief, respondent no.1, denying that the rate of rent at Rs.23=00 per month is the standard rent. According to him, Rs.20=00 per month, which was the previous agreed rent should be the standard rent. The tenant-in-chief, denied that the suit land is reasonably and bonafidely required by the landlord for his personal use. Allegation of nuisance was also denied by him. He, however, admitted that the super-structure alongwith the suit land was let out by him to the defendant nos.2 and 3, who are doing business in the super-structure and that these defendants did not pay any rent to the defendant no.1.