HAZI MAHMED JA Vs. IMRAN HUSSAIN CHOUDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is by the defendant-tenant against the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court.

(2.) THE intrinsic facts to get a grip of the questions of law raised by the petitioner : The plaintiff filed the ejectment suit, claimed arrears of rent, compensation and ejectment of the defendant from the suit premises. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was a monthly tenant, the fenancy commenced from the 1st day of every English Calendar month, the rent was fixed at Rs. 300/- payable within the first week of the succeeding month. The defendant was an inveterate defaulter in payment of rent and the plaintiff had to exercise much to recover the arrears. When the defendant defaulted to pay rent for December 1971 and January 1972 within the stipulated time he had to serve quit notice to the defendant demanding delivery of possession of the premises on the expiry of the month of Feb. 1972. The defendant received the notice but did not comply with the terms thereof and hence the suit.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has put forward the following contentions; (1) that there was no finding as to what was the "rent allowable under the Act", the courts below were obliged to consider what was the "fair rent" and without determination of the question the courts had no jurisdiction to decree the suit, and, (2) that the defendant having deposited the rent into court on 18-2-1972 as required under the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1961, for short "the Act", was not a defaulter and the court had no jurisdiction to pass the ejectment decree. No other point has been urged.