SUSHILABHAI DATTARAYA DESHMUKH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants before me are wife and husband and they were tried and convicted for an offence under Section 18(4) of the Bombay Rent Act and each of them is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300 or in default of payment of the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. They came to be prosecuted under the following circumstances.

(2.) Applicant No. 1 owns a building known as 'Deshmukh House' situated at plot No. 167 Shri Krishna Nagar, Borivli, Bombay 66. Appellant No. 2, her husband, is managing her affairs. Both the appellants started construction of the building in the year 1968 or so. On certain representations made by appellant No. 2 respondent No. 1 agreed to be a tenant of a certain flat in the proposed building. Respondent No. 1, as demanded by the appellants, advanced a construction loan of Rs. 5,000. Various sums were paid from time to time and according to the respondent when the balance payable was only Rs. 250, an agreement in writing was executed. This was on January 1, 1969. The agreement is produced in this case at Exh. B. It contains various terms of tenancy. The tenant was to occupy one flat and pay Rs. 60 per month as rent and other water and electric charges. Half the payment of the rent was to be adjusted towards the repayment of the loan. After repayment of the loan, the tenant was to continue in occupation as a monthly tenant of the flat. The agreement is stamped paper and it was never registered. Clause (2) of th original agreement was to the following effect :

(3.) On December 23, 1971 the tenant filed a complaint against both the accused charging them with the commission of an offence under Section 18 of the Rent Act. The allegation was that the appellants had committed offences also under Section 24 of the Rent Act and Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.