KANTILAL KATANSI KOTHARI Vs. HOUSE ALLOTMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Kantilal has filed this Letters Patent Appeal, challenging the order passed by the single Judge of this Court on 22.6.1981, rejecting his writ petition No. 1493 of 1981 in limine.

(2.) THE facts which gave rise to the present Latters Patent Appeal may be stated, in brief, as follows :- Respondent No. 3 Sarlabai wife of Sadashivrao Buty is the owner of a Chawl bearing No. 3 located at Abhyankar Road, Nagpur, Block No. 1 from the said Chawl was let out to respondent No. 2 M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company through its partner Smt. Banarasi Devi of Bajranglal Garodiya about 20 years back as a tenant on the rent of Rs. 65.40 per month. It was a monthly tenancy. Respondent No. 2 was paying rent regularly and respondent No. 3 was issuing receipts. The last receipt was issued on 3rd July, 1978 for the month of June, 1978 for the rent of Rs. 70.67 which included the rent and additional amount of Rs. 6.27 in lieu of some taxes. According to the tenant M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company, respondent No. 3 illegally and unauthorisedly with an ulterior motive to benefit herself monetarily conspired with the petitioner Kantilal and respondent No. 4 Dr. Vinodkumar Agrawal to create new rights in their favour as tenants in respect of the very said premises which was in occupation of respondent No. 2 M/s Patel Cycle Trading company. It appears that since July, 1978 the agent of the owner did not collect rent for about 4 to 5 months from M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company and instead started collecting rent from the petitioner and respondent No. 4, at the rate of Rs. 100/- and Rs. 60/- per month respectively. The owner actually started issuing receipts in favour of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 treating them as tenants in respect of the said premises. When M/s Patel Cycle Company learnt about this, they approached the owner pointing out the apparently illegal act committed by her. However, this had no effect and the owner continued to receive rent from the petitioner and respondent No. 4, and therefore, M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company was constrained to move the House Allotment Officer, Nagpur under clause 28 of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Order, for short) for suitable action.

(3.) THIS application was contested by the landlady as well as by the petitioner and respondent No. 4. According to the landlady, Smt Banarsidevi wife of Bajranglal Garodiya, named as partner of M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company, was not the tenant but one Shankarlal Patel, Proprietor of M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company, was the tenant. According to the landlady, Shri Shankarlal Patel left Nagpur Severale years before and thereafter the business was conducted in the same premises under the name M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company. Thus, in short, she denied that there was any contract either with Smt. Banarsidevi or M/s Patel Cycle Trading Company of which Smt. Banarasidevi was the partner. According to her, somewhere in July, 1978 petitioner Kantilal was found in occupation of the premises, doing business under the name and style 'M/s Dayal Cycle Stores'.