AJABRAO NARAYAN YADGIRE Vs. BEHRAM JAHANGIR IRANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff landlord filed regular civil suit no.355 of 1974 against the defendant tenant in the court of Civil Judge J.D. Kalyan for possession of the suit premises under the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act. The plaintiff claimed to be the owner of the property bearing CTS no.3088 which is situated at Murbad Road Kalyan, and upon the said property there was a shed bearing house no 67-J. The said shed was let to the defendant as a monthly tenant at the rate of Rs 30.00 per month for carrying on his business of laundry. It was contended that the defendant is in arrears of rent from 1.7.1971. It was further contended that the defendant despite notice has not paid the arrears. It was then contended that the plaintiff required the possession of the shed from defendant for demolishing the same and erecting a new structure which is necessary for enabling the plaintiff to construct a show room for Java Scooters in which the plaintiff is dealer. The plaintiff issued notice dated 3.8.1974 to the defendant tenant demanding arrears of rent as well as possession and upon failure the suit was filed on 28.10.1974.

(2.) THE defendant resisted the suit and denied the status of the plaintiff as is landlord. The defendant contended that one J M.Irani father of the plaintiff was owner of the plot and after constructing a shed the said father of the plaintiff inducted the defendant in a tenement admeasuring 35 ft x 23 ft on a monthly rent of Rs.30.00. The defendant contended that as the plaintiff has not proved that he is the owner of the suit property he cannot demand rent or claim possession of the suit property. The defendant contended that he was paying rent to said J.M.Irani but J M.Irani was not issuing rent receipts. The defendant contended that the plaintiff has ample other open land to construct his show room. At the trial the plaintiff examined himself while the defendant examined himself and two other witnesses. The plaintiff produced gift deed, property extract as also certificate issued by the Tribunal as required under section 13 of Rent Act. The plaintiff also given undertaking as required under the Rent Act. The learned judge of the trial court on the basis of the evidence on record held that the defendant tenant is a defaulter and is not ready and willing to pay the standard rent and permitted increases. The learned Judge of the trial court also held that the plaintiff needs the suit property for immediate purpose of demolition and construction of new structure. Accordingly by judgment and decree dated 17.2.1981 the learned Judge of the trial court decreed the suit.

(3.) THE learned Judge negatived the case of the plaintiff for eviction under the provisions of section 13(1)(hh) of the Rent Act. Since however, the learned Judge held that the defendant is proved to be a defaulter he confirmed the decree of possession and dismissed the appeal with costs by his judgment and decree dated 2.2.1983.