ZAFFAR HUSSAIN Vs. MAHABIR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has moved this Court, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ quashing the order dated the 5th November, 1955, of the Additional' Commissioner, and the order dated the 30th August 1955, of the Collector, passed in a proceeding under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 (Bihar Act III of 1947), hereinafter referred to as "the Act". THE opposite party No. 1 has shewn cause, and filed a counter-affidavit.

(2.) THE petitioner is the landlord of old holding No. 2B/1 and new holding No. 17, circle No. 22, situated on the Ashoka Raj Path, in Mahalla Muradpur in the town of Patna Opposite party No. 1 took a portion of this holding on lease for a fixed period commencing from the 9th April, 1949. to the 30th January, 1954, under a registered 'Sataua Pataua Kerayanama Patta' dated the 15th June, 1949, on a monthly rental of Rs. 215/-. Out of this monthly rental of Rs. 215/-, a sum of Rs. 200/- was to be set off towards the loan of Rs. 10,000/-, which had been taken by the petitioner from opposite party No. 1; under the above lease. Out of Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 8,000/- carried interest, and Rs. 2,000/- carried no interest. THE parties; therefore, contracted that Rs. 200/-would be set off towards the principal and the interest every month, and, the balance Rs. 15/-would be paid by opposite party No. 1 on the 9th of every month to the petitioner. THEre was a further stipulation that on the 30th January, 1954, as the entire loan with interest would be satisfied, opposite party No. 1, on expiry of the above date, without any objection, shall vacate the house, and, give seer possession to the petitioner. THEre was also a stipulation,, in the aforesaid lease, that opposite party No. 1 had no right, and, would not, in any case, sublet the building to anybody. Opposite party No. 1 was carrying on his business in the leased portion of the building of the petitioner in the name of Nagpore Cloth House.

(3.) A reply to the aforesaid notice was sent by opposite party No. 1 on the 28th January, 1954, in which it was stated that he had been advised by his lawyer to remit Rs. 30/- to the petitioner by money order, and, it was further stated that the petitioner had executed three handnotes, namely, on the 3rd January, 1953, for Rs. 500/-, on the 17th March for Rs. 458/13/-, and on the 9th July, 1953, for Rs. 278/4/9, each carrying interest at 9 per cent, per mensem, and, therefore, the amount of these three handnotes would be adjusted towards rent from the month of February, 1954. Opposite party No. 1 sent Rs. 30/- by money order on the 2Sth January, 1954, but it was refused by the petitioner, as it was sent after the notice to quit was served by the petitioner.