SHARADKUMAR NAGJIBHAI PATEL Vs. INDRAJIT R ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of these appeals the applicants have challenged the Judgment and decree dated 30.09.1999,passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Vadodara, in Civil Appeal NO. 23 of 1996, whereby the learned Judge has partly allowed the appeal and reversed the view taken by the Trial Court.

(2.) THE short facts of this case are that the suit premises situated at Hastinapur, Kareli Baug behind Aryakanya Vidhayalaya in Vadodara, comprises of three rooms, kitchen bath room and latrine. It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant No.1 has let out the suit premises for residence at a monthly rent of Rs. 475/-. THE month of tenancy begins from the first day of the English calender month ending of the last day. It is alleged that rent was due from 1.9.1984 to 1.12.1988 to an extent of Rs. 24,225/- which are not paid and hence by a notice dated 24.03.1986 demand was raised terminating the suit tenancy. THEn it is contended that the defendant No.1 is in arrears of rent for more than six months. THErefore, the Original plaintiff filed Rent Suit No. 61 of 1989 on the ground stated therein. From the record it seems that the defendant's right was struck off. THE Trial Court has framed following issues:-

(3.) FROM the evidence on record it is established that considering the amount of annual assessment, the plaintiff's area which the plaintiff has deposed, it is difficult to hold that the premises in possession of the plaintiff is not sufficient to accommodate all the family members of the plaintiff. This evident from the evidence of the plaintiff itself. Further, using some part of the premises for making furniture cannot be said to be converting the whole premises for some other purpose. Moreover, there is no evidence to show that the defendant has subletted the premises.