CHASE BRIGHT STEEL LIMITED Vs. SHANTARAM SHANKAR SAWANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the original defendant-tenant seeking to challenge a decree for possession passed by both the lower courts under the Bombay Rent Act on the ground that the defendant was in default in payment of rent. The contractual rent in respect of the premises in occupation of the defendant was Rs. 358.29 p. The plaintiffs by their notice dated 27th of July, 1977 claimed arrears of permitted increase at the rate of Rs. 56.50 p.per month which had fallen in arrears with effect from the 1st February, 1976. The said notice was served upon the defendants on the 29th July, 1977. The defendants on the 29th of August, 1977 filed its standard rent application being Miscellaneous Application No. 256 of 1977 and on the same day obtained order of ad interim standard rent at Rs. 358/- per month. The defendant in the said standard rent application continued to deposit the aforesaid interim rent month to month. However, that standard rent application came to be dismissed for default on the 11th of September, 1981 in as much as the defendant had failed to serve the plaintiffs with the standard rent application as also the order fixing interim rent. The defendant, however, continued to deposit the interim rent in that standard rent application despite the aforesaid dismissal presumably because it was unaware of the said dismissal.

(2.) The plaintiffs in the meanwhile on the 26th April, 1979 filed the present suit for possession on the ground that the defendant was in default in payment of permitted increases arrears being from February, 1976. By Judgment and decree dated the 14th September, 1983 the trial Court fixed the permitted increases at Rs. 56/- per month and held that the standard rent in respect of the said premises was Rs. 358/- plus permitted increase at Rs. 56/- per month. It was held that the defendant was in arrears of rent and permitted increases for more than six months and it was not ready and willing to pay rent or the permitted increases. Consequently, the suit of the plaintiffs for possession was decreed.

(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment and decree the defendant preferred in the District court, Pune, an approval wherein the learned District Judge by his Judgment and decree dated the 7th October 1985 dismissed the appeal with costs. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgments and decrees, the defendant-tenant has preferred the present writ petition.