Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the original plaintiff and landlord, filed a suit for eviction of the respondent-tenant under Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (Bombay Rent Act) on the ground of default in payment of rent. The trial court, by order dated 7th January 1997 in Regular Civil Suit No.881 of 1990, decreed the suit in favor of the landlord, finding that the tenant had defaulted in paying rent and had not deposited the rent on the first day of hearing as required under the Act. The tenant appealed, and the IVth Additional District Judge, Thane, by judgment and order dated 17th January 2001 in Civil Appeal No.71 of 1997, allowed the appeal and set aside the trial court's decree. The landlord then filed the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the appellate court's order. The High Court heard the petitioner's counsel, as the respondents were absent despite service and two previous callings. The court examined the record and found that the tenant had not paid rent regularly and had not deposited the rent on the first day of hearing. The appellate court had reversed the trial court's findings without proper justification. The High Court held that the appellate court's order was perverse and that the tenant's failure to deposit rent on the first day of hearing disentitled him to the protection of the Rent Act. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the appellate court's order, and restored the trial court's decree of eviction.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Eviction for Default - Section 12(2) Bombay Rent Act, 1947 - Landlord filed suit for eviction on ground of default in payment of rent - Trial court decreed eviction finding tenant in arrears and not depositing rent on first day of hearing - Appellate court reversed holding tenant not in default - High Court in writ petition held that Appellate Court erred in interfering with findings of fact and that tenant's failure to deposit rent on first day of hearing disentitled him to protection - Held that Appellate Court's order was perverse and liable to be set aside (Paras 4-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Appellate Court was justified in reversing the trial court's decree of eviction under Section 12(2) of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947, when the tenant had defaulted in payment of rent and failed to deposit the rent on the first day of hearing.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the appellate court's order dated 17th January 2001, and restored the trial court's decree of eviction dated 7th January 1997.
Law Points
- Eviction on ground of default in payment of rent
- Section 12(2) of Bombay Rent Act
- 1947
- Tenant's failure to pay rent regularly
- Deposit of rent on first day of hearing
- Appellate court's interference with trial court's findings
- Scope of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India
