VRAJLAL RATILAL Vs. SHAH BALUBEN TALAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision application under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates (Controls) Act, 1947 challenging the judgments and decrees of the two courts below, under which the present petitioner-original tenant-defendant has been directed to be evicted from the tenanted property on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent. The respondent herein preferred a suit being Regular Civil Suit No.177/76 before the civil court at Chotila, Surendranagar District for evicting the petitioner from the tenanted property on the ground of non payment of arrears of rent. After hearing the parties and considering the evidence on record, the learned trial Judge decreed the suit in favour of the respondent and against the petitioner.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and decree of the trial court, the petitioner herein preferred Regular Civil Appeal No.132/82 before the District Court at Surendranagar unsuccessfully. The learned Assistant Judge dismissed the said appeal by judgment and decree dated 30.9.1986. Hence this revision application.

(3.) Learned Advocate for the petitioner-original defendant-tenant has contended before this court that the two courts below have committed serious illegality in granting the decree for eviction of the petitioner on the ground of non payment of arrears of rent. It is also contended that the rent was payable according to Samvat Year calendar and that was an illegal contract in view of the provisions made under the Bombay Rent Act. That the demand made by the respondent in the notice under section 12(2) of the Act was also illegal inasmuch as the demand was made according to that calendar and not according to British calendar. That therefore, the two courts below ought to have dismissed the said suit of the respondent. It is, therefore, contended here that the judgments and decrees of the two courts below are illegal, perverse and deserve to be set aside. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the present revision application be allowed and the judgements and decrees of the two courts below may be set aside and the suit of the respondent before the trial court may be ordered to be dismissed with costs all throughout.