EKNATH KIRA AKHADKAR Vs. ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these eight writ petitions arise out of the judgments passed by the Administrative Tribunla , dismissing appeals filed by the petitioners against Orders of eviction made by the Rent controller under Ss. 22(2)(a) or s. 32 (4) of the Goa, Adman and diu Buildings (Lease , Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 19968 (hereinafter called the Act for sake of brevity). Though the facts that led to said orders of eviction and judgment are not the same and, therefore, some pf the grounds of attack fioffer in according with the peculiarities of each case, the main challenge is nevertheless common. It becomes , thus, appropriate and convenient to jointly dispose of all these petitions and accordingly of they will be death with by this single judgment.

(2.) In the petition No. 165|75, the petitioners case is that, nor about 29th June, 1970, respondent 3,4 and 5 instituted in the court of the Rent controller, North Goa, proceedings for eviction of the petitioners from a house existing at Ribandar and occupied by them. The said petition was resisted by the petitioner on the ground that the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to entertain and try the application as nowhere it hasd been avered in the application that the petitioners were occupying the house tenants and also on different grounds. The application was dismissed by the Rent Controller after holding that the subdued matter would not fall within the purview of the Act, Respondent 3,4 and 5 filed an appeal against theorizer of the Rent Controller to the Administrative Tribunal and in the course of the hearing of the said appeal, it was suggested that respondents 3,4 and 5 should file a fresh application before the controller. Accordingly , on 22-9-71, the aforesaid respondent 3,4 and 5 presented in the court of the Rent Controller, North Goa Division a fresh application for eviction of te petitioners on the ground that they had not complied with the notice dated 21-8-1969. The Rent controller by his Order dated 14-1-74 held Tahiti the relationship between the respondents 3,4 and 5 the petitioners was of landlord and tenant and that respondent 3 had made efforts to have te lease contracts executed and directed the petitioners to put the said respondents 3,4 and 54 in possession of the suit premises within three months from the date of the order as they were in default of the payment of ret. Aggrieved by this Order of the Rent Controller, petitioners filed and appeal against the said order in the Administrative Tribunal which was dismissed by the judgment dated 31-12-1975.

(3.) In Writ Petition NO. 2|b|77 the petitioners case is that respondent 1 filed an applications before the Rent Control North Goa division for the eviction of the petitioner under S. 22 (2) (a) of the Act on the ground that the petitioners had failed to pay rent for ta period of three months. Notice of the said applications was served on the petitioners on 21st June, 1974. In his reply dated 25th July , 1974 the petitioners showed cause against the said application by filing a written statement and admitting therein that he was in arrears of rent for the months of March to May, 1974 amounting to Rs. 114|-. He further moved an application before the learned Rent controller praying that he be permitted to deposit the rent due and the Rent controller was pleased to permit the petitioners to deposit the rent, which accordingly was deposited on 9-7-74. However, by his judgment andordoer dated 23rd December, 1975 the Rent Controller was pleased dto allow the application of respondent 1 and to order that tehepetitioners should vacate the suit premises within three months from date of the issue of the order. The petitioners, being aggrieved by the said order preferred application to the Administrative Tribunal of Goa, Adman and Diu and the said appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal by its order dated 8-776 wherein it was held that the petitioners had failed to proved reasonable cause to justify his default in the payment of rent.