MOHANLAL BAPUBHAI SHAH Vs. ANANT RAMCHAN DEDIZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question involved in this revision application is whether a tenant is entitled to file a fresh application for fixation of standard rent under the provisions of section 11 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) even though in an earlier proceedings between the tenant and the landlord under section 11 of the Act standard rent was fixed by the consent of parties at a particular amount. Three plots of land situation at Sangli were let out by the petitioner landlord to the respondent tenant. Plot No. 1 was leased on January 2, 1946, at a rent of Rs. 250/- per month ; Plot No. 1/1 was leased on April 6, 1948, at a rent of Rs. 70/- per month and Plot No. 199 was leased on December 14, 1952, at a rent of Rs. 31/- per month. The aggregate rent of three plots came to Rs. 351-9-0 per month. The lease in respect of all the three plots was to continue upto October 30, 1970. In the year 1953 the lessee filed Miscellaneous Application No. 90 of 1963 under section 11 of that Act against the father of the petitioner in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division Sangli for fixation of standard rent of the three pieces of land. The trial Court by its order dated August 20, 1995 fixed the standard rent of the three plots at Rs. 126-11-4 per month. The father of the petitioner (landlord) preferred an appeal being Civil Application No. 357 of 1955 in the Court of the District Judge South Satara, Sangli. Cross objections were filed by the tenants. In that appeal, by consent of the parties on April 15, 1958, standard rent was fixed by the Appellate Court at the rate of Rs. 240/- per month and a consent order to that effect fixing the standard rent was passed by the Appellate Court in the appeal filed by the petitioners father. Cross-objections filed by the tenants were withdrawn. It is the case of the tenant that notwithstanding such fixation of standard rent for the years 1964 to 1970, the landlord used to recover in aggregate a sum of Rs. 323/33 per month by way of rent. Thereafter it is his case that rent at the rate of the half of the above figure was sent by money order by the tenant to the landlord but the same was refused by the landlord on the ground that the lease had expired by efflux of time.

(2.) It may be stated that in the original lease in respect of three pieces of lands, it is the case of the landlord that he is given an option to purchase the structure erected by the tenants on these pieces of lands on payment of 3/4th of the market value, while it is the case of the tenant that upon the expiry of the lease he has option to renew the lease of the three pieces of land for a further period of 26 years on payment of 1 times the contractual rents. In view of these contentions, the landlord filed a suit being Suit No. 44 of 1972 for specific performance. The trial Court passed a decree for specific performance in favour of the landlord. The tenant has preferred an appeal being First Appeal No. 483 of 1976 in the High Court and the same is pending before this Court.

(3.) The landlord gave a notice to the tenant on January 3, 1974 calling upon him to pay all the arrears of rent failing due since November 1, 1970. It was further stated in the said notice that in default of payment of the arrears of rent such legal proceedings as may be permissible under the law would be taken. A reply to this notice was sent by the tenant on January 10, 1974, whereby he called for a clarification from the landlord as regards the rate i.e. at which the rent was demanded and was asked for. Alongwith this letter a sum of Rs. 4820/- was sent by way of provisional rent and it was stated therein that the balance of the amount would be sent upon receiving clarification. On February 7th, 1974, the landlord filed a suit against the tenant being Civil Suit No. 50 of 1974 claiming ejectment of the tenant on the ground of default in payment of rent in view of the provisions of section 12 of the Act and for arrears of standard rent at the of Rs. 240/- per month. After the suit was instituted, on February 28, 1974, the tenant filed an application being Miscellaneous Application No. 20 of 1974, under section 11 of the Act for fixation of standard rent of all the three pieces of lands in question. The controversy in this revision application arises out of this application made by the tenant for fixation of standard rent.