DHRUVAKUMAR HARIBHAU GUJRATHI Vs. DATTATRAYA SHANKAR CHIKHLIKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner tenant has invoked article 227 of Constitution of India and sought to challenge the concurrent finding of facts, given by the Courts below, whereby, the respondent-landlord's suit for possession have been decreed on the ground of arrears of rent.

(2.) The premises in question are Municipal House No. 25, situated at nashik. The tenancy was monthly. The rent was Rs. 11/- plus education cess. As per the respondents, the notice dated 30-3-1983 was issued under certificate of posting. The petitioner-tenant in spite of the receipt of the notice failed to comply the same and therefore, the suit for possession was filed by the respondent in the court of Jt. Civil Judge, J. D. Nashik (trial Court). The said suit was resisted by the defendant by filing written statement and additional written statement. The evidence was led by the parties. The respondent examined himself. No postman was examined in the matter. The learned Judge after perusal of the material placed on the record granted the decree for possession. The Additional District judge, Nashik (Appellate Court) after considering the rival contentions between the parties, rejected the appeal. Therefore, the present writ petition.

(3.) Heard the learned Counsel Mr. R. M. Hardas, for the petitioner and the learned counsel Mr. S. M. Gorwadkar, appearing for the respondent. The basic submission revolving around the issue i. e. whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the issuance of the demand notice under certificate of posting, itself is a sufficient compliance as contemplated under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short Bombay Rent Act).