ISHWARDAS Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE NAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, the tenants challenge the order passed by the reviewing authority as also the appellate authority granting permission to issue a quit notice.

(2.) INITIALLY, the Rent Controller had rejected the application made on behalf of respondent No. 2/landlady under the provisions of clause 13 (3) (i) (iii) (vi) and (vii) of the C. P. and Berar letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (hereinafter called the Rent Control Order for the sake of brevity ). In the appeal, the appellate court granted the permission under clause 13 (3) (i)and (iii) of the Rent Control Order, holding that the tenant had fallen in arrears of rent of more than three months and had sublet the premises. Two review applications came to be filed against this order one by the landlady and another by the tenants. The tenants review application was rejected, while the review application by the landlady was allowed and the finding of the appellate authority was confirmed and in addition to that the reviewing authority also granted permission under clause 13 (3) (ii) on the ground that the tenants had become habitual defaulters and under clause 13 (3) (viii) on the ground that the tenants had committed an act of waste thereby materially impairing the utility and/or value of the property in dispute.

(3.) IT must be said at the outset that the order passed by the reviewing authority in respect of the permission under clause 13 (3) (ii), on the ground that the tenants had become habitual defaulters, is not correct, at all, for the simple reason that was not the case pleaded by the landlady in her application. That finding of the reviewing authority will have to be set aside and is set aside.