LAWS(BOM)-1971-11-3

RAYABAI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On November 12, 1971
RAYABAI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by a landlord whose suit for possession of the property was dismissed by the appellate Court which reversed the decree of the trial Court which granted the claim.

(2.) The petitioner is the owner of City Survey No. 2607 situated at Meharun within the municipal limits of Jagaon. On this site there are five buildings which have been leased to the respondent, the State of Maharashtra, on a monthly tenancy at a rent of Rs.250/- per month. The lease was effected for the purpose of occupation of police personnel of the respondent. In Civil Suit No.19 of 1965 filed on March 22, 1965, which was decreed on July 2, 1966, the plaintiff was held entitled to charge permitted increases at the rate of Rs. 32.66 in addition to rent and the said suit was decreed for the arrears claimed therein. The claim of the plaintiff for the educational cess was disallowed on the ground that there was no notice served by him on the respondent on that account.

(3.) On October 3, 1966, by Ex. 26 the petitioner served a notice upon the respondent claiming arrears of rent for more than six months. By the said notice the tenancy of the respondent was terminated with effect fro October 31, 1966. In the said notice in paragraph 4, respondent No.1 was told that if default was made in compliance with the terms of the notice, a suit would be filed for the recovery of possession and other reliefs. In the said paragraph it was also mentioned that 'this was notice under Section 80 of the Civil P. C.' Within the period required by the statute there was no compliance by the respondent. The petitioner therefore filed the suit on January 23, 1967, claiming arrears of permitted increases from March 22, 1965 to October 31, 1966, arrears of education cess for a period of three years upto October 31, 1966, rent for August, September and October 1966 and compensation from November 1966 to January 22, 1967. The petitioner also claimed possession and future mesne profits until delivery of possession and costs.