(1.) This application and Civil Revision Applications Nos. 96 of 1960 and 8 of 1961 though involving different facts raise common questions of law as to the construction of sec. 12 of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act (LVII of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and can expediently be disposed of by a common judgment. Though questions arising in these applications have been previously dealt with in several applications of this kind there have been so many opinions diversely expressed in reported as well as unreported judgments that we think that the law laid down in section 12 of the Act needs to be restated.
(2.) We propose to take up first Civil Revision Application No. 86 of 1960 as it is in that application that the learned advocates concerned therein as also others interested in the other applications urged their various points of view and pointed out to us expressions of opinions in several judgments both reported and unreported.
(3.) In Civil Revision Application No. 86 of 1960 the petitioner took over the premises in question on October 13 1952 as a monthly tenant at Rs. 25/as rent per month. He paid the rent upto July 12 1954 but did not pay any rent thereafter. On December 21 1954 the respondent gave notice demanding arrears of rent and terminating the tenancy. Inspite of that notice the petitioner did not pay the arrears nor did he file an application for fixation of the standard rent. It was only on August 8 1955 that he filed such an application being application No. 144 of 1955 for fixation of the standard rent The petitioner however did not deposit any amount towards the payment of the arrears due by him. On September 5 1955 the respondent filed the present suit for recovery of possession and arrears due. On December 22 1455 he appeared in Court in answer to the summons. On February 10 1956 he filed his written statement but did not deposit any amount in Court together with his written statement. The suit was fixed for hearing on March 22 1956 On that day the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 75/and between that date and the 25 of April 1957 he deposited diverse amounts in Court aggregating in all to Rs. 900.00. On April 26 1957 he deposited a further amount of Rs. 30/in Court. On April 25 1957 which was the first day of the actual hearing of the suit issues were raised and evidence taken and on April 26 1957 the trial Court delivered the judgment and passed the decree allowing the respondents suit and ordering the petitioner to hand over possession.