SHRIKRISHANADAMODAR PAWAR Vs. HARBANSING CHAMBASING BHATIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. Heard finally the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for then on-applicant, by consent.

(2.) THIS is a civil revision application filed by tenant-member of cooperative society - Swami Vivekanand Sahakari Griha Nirman Sanstha Ltd. Pusad (hereinafter referred to as society ). The suit property is a house situated on Plot No. A-46. The revision-petitioner is undoubtedly, an allottee of the suit property on rent. The suit property was constructed by raising loan from the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. This loan was raised by the plaintiff through the society.

(3.) AFTER obtaining the loan, the plaintiff executed the mortgage-deed dated 21. 12. 1976 in favour of the Finance Corporation. The construction of the house over plot was completed in January 1979. Admittedly, the loan has been entirely repaid. However, the rent was Rs. 150/- per month. The society runs into trouble and the liquidator was appointed on it. The petitioner, who found that defendant had not paid the monthly rent, and terminated the respondents tenancy of the suit property by issuing a notice dated 27. 8. 1994 and filed suit for possession. The Trial Court dismissed the plaintiffs suit by judgment and order dated 31. 3. 1997. The appellate court has confirmed that finding. Both the courts below have dismissed the suit, on the ground that the respondent was inducted in the suit premises byte society and not by the petitioner. It is, therefore, necessary to examine the question as to whether the petitioner is the landlord of the respondent, he is entitled to sue for eviction of the premises or whether it is only the society, which disentitled to file the suit. It is obvious from the byelaws of the society that a member is entitled to let out the house built by him. Bye-law No. 78 (a) in part XXXII which deals with letting of houses, reads as follows :