LAWS(BOM)-1989-7-58

KASHIBAI Vs. DAGDU BASLING KORPE

Decided On July 05, 1989
KASHIBAI Appellant
V/S
Dagdu Basling Korpe Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT is owner of three rooms and Covered verandah in house situated at Kapse Lane, Barshi, District Sholapur and the premises were leased out to Mahadev at the monthly rent of Rs. 5.50. Mahadev died sometime in the year 1970 and on October 30, 1973 the landlord served notice demanding arrears from December 6, 1972 and possession of the suit premises. The notice was served on the petitioners who are the legal representatives of deceased Mahadev. The notice was followed by suit instituted in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Barshi for recovery of possession on three grounds : (1) bonafide personal requirement, (2) default, and (3) non-user of the premises.

(2.) THE trial Court after recording evidence decreed the suit on the ground of requirement and default. The petitioners claimed that the rent was paid to the landlord after receipt of notice under Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rent Act"), but the receipts were not issued on the ground that the receipt books were not ready. The trial Judge did not accept the claim. In appeal preferred by the petitioners before the District Court, Solapur, the 3rd Extra Assistant Judge by judgment dated January 25, 1980 confirmed the decree of eviction but only on the ground of tenant having committed default in payment of rent for more than six months. The decision of the lower appellate Court is under challenge in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution.

(3.) SHRI Gorwadkar then submitted that the notice terminating the tenancy was defective as the tenancy was terminated on November 24, 1973 and that is not a valid notice because 30 days period was not provided and the tenancy did not end at the end of the month. The submission cannot be accepted, because it is now well settled by decision of the Supreme Court that it is not necessary to terminate the tenancy as contemplated under the Transfer of Property Act and the landlord can institute suit by merely giving notice as required under Section 12(2) of the Rent Act.