MEHTAB DAGADUBHAI Vs. SHABBIR AHMAD HIJI-RAHIMTULLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter had appeared before me in the last week for hearing of the Civil Application filed by the Respondent for vacation of the interim relief made in this petition. The learned counsel appearing for the both sides, were present and at that time it was agreed between the parties that instead of hearing the Civil Application separately on the question of interim-relief, the main petition itself should be heard finally. As per this agreement between the parties, the matter is fixed for final hearing. However, none appears for the petitioner. Shri Joshi, the learned counsel appears for the respondent. With the help of Shri Joshi, I have gone through the record and I find that the trial Court has passed a decree of eviction against the tenant-petitioner by the Judgment dated 27.9.1990 on the ground that the tenant has committed default in payment of the amount of rent as also on the ground that the tenant-petitioner has acquired alternate accommodation. The Appellate Court has confirmed this finding of the Trial Court.

(2.) IT is to be seen that the landlord issued a notice to the tenant. The Appellate Court has observed that admittedly, the tenant was in arrears of payment of rent from 1.4.1983. The only defence that was raised by the tenant before the Appellate Court that he paid the amount of Rs.300 towards rent to the brother of the landlord. However, no receipt of this payment was produced. It was the case of the tenant that the landlord did not issued him notice to that effect. The Appellate Court has observed that it is hard to believe that tenant would pay the amount of rent to the brother of the landlord after the landlord has issued notice to him and would not insist on the receipt of payment. The Appellate Court, therefore, refused to believe the statement of the tenant that he had paid the amount of arrears of rent and receipt was not issued by the landlord. It is further pointed out to me that the tenant has not given reply to the notice issued by the landlord, demanding the arrears of payment of rent. The brother of the landlord, to whom according to the tenant the payment of arrears had been made, has been examined as witness and he has denied the receipt of any amount from the tenant, towards the arrears of rent. This finding of the Courts below is based on material on the record and it cannot be disturbed by this Court.