JOSHI RATANSHI GOPALJI Vs. NAROTTAM NARANJI MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision at the instance of the unsuccessful petitioner-original defendant-tenant under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 ('the Rent Act') the sole and short question that falls for judicial analysis and scrutiny is as to whether the tenant is entitled to claim protection of statutory umbrella from ejectment decree on the ground of Section 12(3)(b) of the Rent Act.

(2.) RESPONDENT Nos. 1 to 7 are the original plaintiffs-trustees of a registered trust named Jain Swetambar Murti Pujak Sangh, Bhuj. The petitioner is the original defendant-tenant in respect of the demised shop bearing muncipal census No. 5/314 at the montly rent of Rs. 50/-. The registered trust is hereinafter referred to as the landlord and the petitioner is hereinafter referred to as the tenant for the sake of convenience.

(3.) IT has been contended that the ejectment decree on the ground of Section 12(3) (b) is not legal and valid. The landlord demanded arrears of rent alongwith arrears of education case. A contention is raised that there is no evidence to show that education cess was paid by landlord and it can be claimed by the landlord only if it is paid and since there is no evidence to show that he had as such paid and therefore, the notice is not legal and valid. In support of this contention, reliance is placed on a decision of this court in Ganpatrao Deshmukh v. Sagnubai, 1964 XV GLR 300.