NATHMAL SHALIGRAM MALANI Vs. RANA PRATAP SRIRAM MALVIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) This appeal arises from judgment dated 2-9-1993 passed in Writ Petition No. 416/ 89. The said Writ Petition was filed by the appellant against the order dated 7-1-1988 passed by the Rent Controller holding that the appellant was in arrears of rent and that he was required to make payment of those arrears within the period of one month from the date of the said order.

(3.) The impugned order is sought to be challenged on the ground that the findings arrived at by the learned Single Judge and the lower authority regarding habitual default in payment of rent is contrary to the materials on record and the fact that there was implied agreement between the parties revealed from the conduct of the parties in respect of payment of rent being permissible at the intervals of 3 to 4 months. Secondly, that the learned Single judge and the authorities below failed to take into consideration the fact that the appellant was depositing the rent with the income-tax department consequent to the necessary order in that regard on account of default in payment of income-tax by the respondent. Thirdly, that the ground as regards the habitual default in payment of rent was specifically abandoned by the respondent by filing Pursis in the course of the proceedings before the Rent Controller. Reliance is sought to be placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Rashik Lal and others Vs. Shah Gokuldas Waghajibhai reported in 1989 Mh. L. J. 207 and Mangalbhai and others. Vs. Dr. Radhyshyam reported in air 1993 S. C. 806 in support of contention regarding the approach to be adopted while analysing the materials on record in relation to the plea by the landlord about the habitual default on the part of the tenant. The fourth ground of challenge relates to failure on the part of the authorities and the learned Single Judge to consider the fact that there was a dispute regarding the quantum of rent.