SABAVVA KOM HANMAPPA SIMPIGER Vs. BASAPPA ANDANEPPA CHINIWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal raises a question under Section 28 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. The circumstances giving rise to the execution application in which the question arises are these.

(2.) ONE Sabavva Kom Hanmappa Simpiger, a resident of Muddebihal in the Bijapur District, is the owner of a shop situated in the Muddebihal town. The owner let out the shop to the two defendants upon a lease which commenced on November 11, 1949. The period of the lease expired on November 10, 1950. The annual rent reserved was a sum of Rs. 450. The tenants did not vacate the shop in accordance with the terms of the rent note and so a dispute arose between the parties. On November 16, 1950, the dispute was referred to arbitration and the arbitrators (panchas) after hearing the contentions of the parties gave an award on November 17, 1950.

(3.) UPON this appeal, Mr. Datar for the appellant contends that the Court below was wrong in holding that the decree sought to be executed was one without jurisdiction. At the outest, it may be observed that two points were raised in the lower appellate Court. One of these was one relating to the question of jurisdiction and the other was about the judgment -debtors being contractual tenants. This latter question was rejected by the lower appellate Court and has not been repeated in this Court. The only question for decision, therefore, is whether the lower appellate Court was right in holding that the decree passed by the Court on January 31, 1951 was one without jurisdiction.