BOSTON Vs. S A AKBAR AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these revisions are by the respective tenants in the various rent control petitions filed by the respective landlords. Even though all the Rent Control Petitions were separately tried, since the matter relates to portions of the same building, and more or less a common defence was also taken by the revision petitioners, though separate orders have been passed by the Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority, when the matter came before this Court, in these Revisions, a common argument was taken by all the revision petitioners, which is a general defence taken in all these cases. Since all the matters were heard together, I intend to dispose of the same by this common order, though facts relating to various Revisions are separately extracted.

(2.) C.R.P. No. 450 of 1997 :In this case, the landlord is one S.A. Akbar, who is the absolute owner of shop No. 6 in the ground floor of premises No. 5. Purusawalkam High Road, Vepery, Madras-7. The agreed rent is Rs. 600/-. and it is payable on the first of every succeeding month. It is said that the first respondent, i.e., first petitioner herein is a registered firm of which the other petitioners are the partners. It is alleged in the petition that the landlord is carrying on business under the name and style of Wali Snacks, in premises No. 3/7, Whannels Road, Egmore, Madras-8, which is a rented building. The property belongs to one Mrs. N. M. Thahira, who has issued a notice to the respondent herein, asking him to vacate the shop, since the building is required for demolition and reconstruction. For the above reason, the landlord sought eviction of the petitioners herein, for the purpose of shifting his business to the demised premises. It is further averred that he has no non residential building of his own within the City of Madras, for carrying on the business which is carried on in the rented building.

(3.) In the counter statement filed by all the revision petitioners, they contended that the eviction petition is not maintainable, and the same has been filed with an ulterior motive, in order to harass and intimidate them. It is further averred that since the petitioners refused to adhere to the exorbitant rent, advance and pagadi, eviction petition has been filed without any bona fide to force them to pay or satisfy their demands. It is said that the previous owner of the entire building is Messrs. Hotel Silver Star Private Limited. There are nine shops in the ground floor, and all the purchasers are either close relatives or near relatives of the previous owner. All the sale deeds have been executed only with a premeditated design to evict the tenants, if they failed to submit to the exorbitant demands of the landlord. It is said that all the correspondence relating to the purchase of the property, intimation from the previous owners, communication for collection of rent are also on a similar basis. The revision petitioner also received a letter on 1-12-1983 from an advocate by name M. K. Hidayathullah, directing them to pay the monthly rent to Hajee K. M. Mohammed Ali at No. 664, Poonamallee High Road. The same pattern and system has been followed in respect of other tenants also. In accordance with the desire of the landlord, rent was paid to the power of attorney with effect from 1-11-1983, as the landlord was then residing at Bombay. It is further said that all the purchasers of the ground floor are also having permanent residence at Bombay. It is further averred that the revision petitioner is doing business ever since 23-6-1971 on the specific understanding that their possession will not be disturbed, except for the fact that they should pay a reasonable enhancement in the rent payable by them. Based on the said assurance, substantial investments have been made by the respondent for purchase of furniture, fittings, interior decorations and investment for purchase of stock and materials. Originally the rent was Rs. 375/- and thereafter it was increased to Rs. 600/- from 1-4-1983. It is said that more than 75% of the original amount has now been increased. The landlords were not satisfied with even such a substantial increase and the present sale deeds have been executed as a modus operandi, to compel the tenants to pay a higher amount. It is further averred that the landlord is not doing business at 3/7, Whannels Road, Egmore, Madras. According to their information, no such business is being conducted by the landlord. The landlord is a permanent resident in Bombay and, therefore, the question of carrying on business at Madras is totally false. They also denied the fact that Mrs. N. M. Tahira had issued notice to vacate. It is only an after thought in order to mislead the Court. For the notice of demand to vacate, a reply has been sent refusing to comply with the same, and the present petition has been filed with mala fide intention. It is further averred that under instructions from the landlord, they met one T.A. Khaleel Rehman to discuss the matters relating to the increase of rent, payment of advance, etc. The said Khaleel Rehman disposed the matter with various tenants occupying the respective shops on various dates. Discussions were held on 7-3- 1986, and a demand was made for Rs. 15/- per sq. ft. towards rent, Rs. 1.5 lakhs towards advance and Rs. 1.5 lakhs towards pagdi. During that meeting, one Mr. K. Babu and Mr. T. A. Abdul Razack were present. 15 days after the discussion, the demand was reduced to Rs. 12/- per sq. ft. towards rent, Rs. 1 lakh towards advance and Rs. 11/2 lakhs towards pagadi. Since the demands were high, revision petitioners were not willing to pay the amount, and that was also brought to the notice of the landlords as per their letter dated 3-5-1986. It is only because the tenant could not meet the demands of the landlord, the present petition was filed with a mala fide intention to harass them. They say that no grounds have been made out under S.10(3)(a)(iii) of the Rent Control Act, for ordering eviction. They prayed for dismissal of the eviction petition.