DEVIPRASAD VRAJLAL KACHHIYA Vs. CHHOTALAL NAROTTAMDAS PANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision, under Sec. 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 ('the Bombay Rent Act' for short), the petitioner has assailed the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 108 of 1978, by the learned District Judge, at Bharuch, on 25th July, 1979.

(2.) The petitioner is the original plaintiff-Landlord and respondent No. 1 is the original defendant-Tenant and respondent No. 2 is the brother of the landlord. The parties are, hereinafter, referred to as the 'landlord' and 'the tenant' for the sake of brevity and convenience.

(3.) The landlord filed a Regular Civil Suit No. 143 of 1974, against the tenant, for perpetual injunction and, also for the recovery of the demised premises. The plaintiff and his brother are the owners of an immovable property, situated in Ward No. 3, bearing Municipal No. 273, known as Vankarvad area in Rajpipla town, and the tenant was let two rooms to the west of the said property, which is, hereinafter, referred to as "the demised premises'. The rent note, at Exh. 40, was executed by the tenant, on 18-1-1955, in respect of the demised premises (two rooms). The landlord, infer alia contended that the tenant, without obtaining any consent from the owners and without the permission of the Municipality, started construction work in the demised premises. The landlord had also applied before the Municipality to stop the tenant from constructing and making permanent alterations. The Rajpipla Municipality issued the order restraining the tenant from making construction. However, the landlord alleged that, in complete violation of the order of the Municipality, the tenant continued the construction work and encroached upon the open space on the west of (he demised premises, which was not let to the tenant. Therefore, the landlord filed the suit for perpetual injunction and also for possession.