MANCHERJI PALLONJI CONTRACTOR Vs. DINBAI NUSSERWANJI GOAWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs bring this suit to recover rents in respect of the properties covered by a lease, exhibit A, which is admitted, and in respect of certain other properties let to the defendants for the months of March and April, 1940, amounting to Rs. 3,400 and also to recover a surra of Rs. 3,357-1-0 alleged to be payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs in respect of certain municipal and other taxes in accordance with the provisions of the lease.

(2.) IN paragraph 3 of the written statement of defendant No.2, who alone appears to defend the suit, an agreement alleged to have been come to between the plaintiffs and the original defendant No.1 and defendant No.2 on March 12, 1940, at the office of the plaintiffs' attorneys is set out, under which it is alleged that the time for payment of the amounts claimed in this suit was postponed, and that this suit is premature.

(3.) AFTER defendant No.2 had given evidence for a short time, Mr. Khergamvala abandoned the second issue and relied solely upon issue 1. This issue involves a question of construction of Clause (9) of the lease. That clause is set out in paragraph 3 of the plaint and is in the following terms:- 9. That the lessees shall pay the following Municipal taxes, viz., general tax, halalkhore tax and license Fees, the water tax by meter in respect of the water that may be required for drinking and washing purposes of the cattle and riot taxes and all other existing and future rates taxes or dues; of whatsoever1 kind or nature for the time being payable either by the landlord or tenant in respect of the demised premises or any part thereof and the lessees shall pay to the lessors the amount of such taxes or dues when demanded.