LAWS(BOM)-2004-12-70

SADASHIV GANGARAM LAMBE Vs. SUBHASH AKARAM GOTKHINDE

Decided On December 23, 2004
SADASHIU GANGARAM LAMBE Appellant
V/S
SUBHASH AKARAM GOTKHINDE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. The point which arises for consideration in the matter is whether the notice demanding arrears of rent in excess of exact amount of rent due payable by the tenant on the date of issuance of the notice would render such notice to be in contravention of the provisions of section 12 (2) of the Bombay Rent, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as "the Rent Act" and, therefore, would be invalid and consequently the suit filed on the basis of such notice would not be maintainable.

(2.) THE sub-section (1) of section 12 provides that a landlord shall not be entitled to the recovery of possession of any premises so long as the tenant pays, or is ready and willing to pay, the amount of the standard rent and permitted increases, if any and observes and performs the other conditions of the tenancy, in so far as they are consistent with the provisions of the said act. The sub-section (2) of section 12 provides that:

(3.) THE analysis of section 12 (2) would disclose that it nowhere speaks of the demand to be "legally due and payable" by the tenant but it simply relates to the amount of standard rent and the permitted increases which had remained "due" to the landlord on the date of issuance of the notice. In fact the said provision has been the subject-matter of consideration in various decisions including those relied upon by the learned advocate for the petitioners.