COOVER P. BARUCHA Vs. DANIEL SAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HOUSE Property bearing No. 19 situated at Mahatma Gandhi Road at Pune Cantonment belongs to the respondents. Two blocks bearing Nos. 1-A and 1-B were let out to the petitioner-tenant some time in the year 1940. The petitioner is residing in one of the block, while the other is being used as his Clinic, the petitioner being a Dental Surgeon. The rent in respect of the residential flat was Rs. 50/- while for the Clinic was Rs. 25/-. The tenant was also liable to pay water charges and municipal taxes. It is not in dispute between the parties that from September 1, 1954 onwards, the tenant was liable to pay the standard rent of Rs/ 98.75 in respect of both the blocks.

(2.) THE landlords had instituted Civil Suit No. 1102 of 1965 against the petitioner-tenant for recovery of possession on the ground of bonafide requirement and arrears of rent. That suit had a chequered career and the proceedings went through several appeals but ultimately on October 9, 1980, the claim of the landlord for recovery of possession was dismissed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 555 of 1976. The proceedings travelled from Court to Court as there was some doubt as to whether the provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (Hereinafter referred to as the "Rent Act") are applicable to the property situated within the Cantonment Area. During the pendency of the proceedings, the tenant had deposited diverse amount in the Courts from time to time.

(3.) THE landlord instituted Civil Suit No. 175 of 1971 in the Court of Small Causes, Pune, for recovery of possession under Section 12 of the Rent Act. The landlord claimed that the tenant was in arrears of the rent as well as education cess and as the payment was not made within a period of one month from the service of notice dated June 16, 1970, the tenant is liable to be evicted under Section 12(3)(a) of the Rent Act. The petitioner resisted the suit claiming that he was never in arrears either of the rent or of the education cess and out of abundant caution had forwarded Bank draft of Rs. 3,214.80 within a period of 30 days from the service of notice under Section 12(2) of the Rent Act. The trial Court, after recording evidence, held that arrears were from September 1, 1964 and taking into consideration, the deposits made by the tenant in the previous proceedings, the conclusion is that the amounts deposited were not enough to cover entire arrears. The trial Court held that even though the tenant was in arrears, the amount was not cleared within one month form the date of service of notice under Section 12(2) of the Rent Act and, therefore, the tenant was liable to be evicted under Section 12(3)(b) of the Rent Act.