JULIANA MARGARIDA COELHO Vs. MAKARAND SHANKAR PARNAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed this revision application against the order passed by the learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay, where by he set aside the order that was passed by his predecessor and permitted the defendant to defend the suit unconditionally and expedited the hearing of the matter.

(2.) A suit for possession and arrears of rent was filed by the landlady (plaintiff) against the tenant (defendant) in respect of a flat situate in a building belonging to the Co-operative Housing Society. The plaintiff felt that the defendant was permitted to occupy the flat as a licensee. However, since in the proceedings for eviction, he contended that he was a tenant, she accepted the same position and took the further proceedings on that footing. The case of the plaintiff is that the agreed rent payable by the defendant-tenant was Rs, 400/- per month. Her allegation in the plaint is that when the defendant was permitted to occupy the flat, the monthly outgoing in respect of the flat for municipal taxes, security, water charges etc., were Rs. 150/- and on the date of the making of the application the same were Rs. 168.83. According to the plaintiff, the defendant-tenant did not pay any rent for a period of nearly 18 months from March 1, 1970. Ultimately, the plaintiffs served a notice upon the tenant terminating his tenancy on or about July 8,1971. Ultimately, in the month of October 1971, the plaintiff-landlady filed a suit for eviction against the defendant-tenant and for arrears of rent.

(3.) In the written statement the defendant claims a dispute as regards the standard rent of the premises and also alleged that certain payments were made in respect of which no credit was given by the landlady. After the suit was instituted, by the order passed by the trial Court on April 17,1972 the defendant-tenants was directed to deposit in Court the sum of Rs. 800/-. being the arrears of rent and compensation upto the end of March 1972 within eight weeks and was thereafter directed to deposit Rs. 160/- on 20th day of every following two months commencing from August 20, 1972. The order further provided that if the defendant failed to comply with the order he would not be entitled to appear in or defend the suit except with leave of the Court.