MADHUKAR R JAVLE Vs. BASKAR RAMNATH SHIBAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 227, the petitioner seeks to challenge an order passed by the Small Causes Court, Bombay, granting respondents notice for inspection of the flats situated on the second and third floor of the suit building, which are not subject-matter of the suit. Apparently, the Small Causes Court has taken recourse to provisions of Order 39, Rule 7 (a) of the C. P. C. The short question is whether the Lower Court was right in granting inspection of premises, which are not the subject-matter of the suit and are in possession of third parties.

(2.) BEFORE I deal with the rival contentions, I would like to state briefly the facts leading to this petition, which are few and almost undisputed. The petitioner is the owner of the building known as "fair Field Annexe" situated at Veer Savarkar Marg, Mahim, Bombay. The respondent is the tenant of flat No. 3 on the second floor of the said building. The petitioner has filed R. A. E. and R. Suit No. 1504/5511 of 1982 against the respondent for possession on the ground of default in payment of rent. The respondent has filed R. A. N. No. 437/s. R. of 1982 for fixation of standard rent. Both these proceedings are being heard together by the order of the Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court.

(3.) THE respondent has taken out Notice No. 2031 of 1995 for allowing the respondent and his architect and authorised agent to enter upon and take inspection of two flats, namely flat No. 6 on the second floor and flat No. 7 on third floor, which are admittedly not the subject-matter of the proceedings before the Small Causes Court. According to the respondent, such inspection is necessary for the purpose of determining the controversy between the parties about the standard rent of the suit flat No. 3, which is the subject-matter of the suit. It is the case of the respondent that the landlord himself was in occupation in respect of one of these two flats and he was paying rent of Rs. 1,000/- per month. It is said that the area of the said flats is equal to the suit flat and, therefore, the standard rent of the suit flat should be the same i. e. Rs. 1,000/- per month. The respondent says that in order to establish the area and location of these flats are identical, an inspection is necessary.