BABARAO MIRGAJI HARAMKAR Vs. GANGADEVI SHRIKISAN SEWAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application raises an interesting question which has often cropped up and is bound to come in future as to in what circumstances a transferee from a landlord can sue and recover possession of demised property from a tenant on the basis of rights which had accrued to his transferor while he was the landlord.

(2.) THE few facts which have to be stated are that the house in question was owned by one Madanlal Agarwal. The petitioner was a tenant of Madanlal in respect of a portion of the house situate in Ward No. 41, House No. 1177 in Juna Sarafa locality of Amravati. Madanlal filed a proceeding before the Rent Controller against the original petitioner Babarao, hereinafter referred to as "Babarao" for permission to terminate his tenancy. That was an application filed under clause 13(3)(i) and (ii) of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, hereinafter referred to as the "Rent Control Order". The Controller negatived the contention of Madanlal that Babarao was in arrears of rent for a period more than three months. He, therefore, fixed the time for Babarao to pay the amount within that time, which Babarao failed. Permission, therefore, came to be granted to Madanlal on 20th August, 1970, which became effective on the expiry of period of 30 days, which was granted for deposit. On 20th September, 1970, it appears that Babarao filed an appeal before the Resident Deputy Collector, against the order of Rent Controller, which was dismissed on the 20th August, 1973. During this time Babarao seems to have been going on paying rent to Madanlal. On 1st December 1977, Madanlal sold this property to Gangadevi, present respondent landlord, hereinafter referred to as "Gangadevi". As plaint allegations go to show, even after Gangadevi became the owner of the suit house, she received rent and was paid rent by Babarao for the period 1.12.1977 to 31.1.1978.

(3.) HER suit came to be decreed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Amarvati, exercising Small Cause Powers, being Small Cause Suit No. 140 of 1978. It is against that decree that the present revision is filed.