Case Note & Summary
The dispute pertains to a suit for eviction filed by the landlady, Mrs. Kusum Pandurang Keni, against the tenant, Sudhir Kumar Sengupta (since deceased, represented by his legal heirs), for recovery of possession of Flat No. 8 in Dr. Keni's House, Sion, Mumbai, on the ground of default in payment of rent. The tenant was inducted as a monthly tenant at a rent of Rs. 43.76 per month, exclusive of permitted increases. According to the landlady, the tenant failed to pay rent, permitted increases (repair cess and education tax of Rs. 20.24 per month), and water pump charges (Rs. 10 per month) from October 1972. She sent a notice dated 22 March 1982 demanding arrears, which was served on the tenant on 8 April 1982. The tenant did not pay the arrears within one month of the notice. The landlady filed R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 313/1024 of 1983 for eviction and recovery of Rs. 2,664/- as arrears. The tenant denied receipt of the notice and claimed readiness and willingness to pay standard rent and permitted increases. The Trial Court, after comparing signatures, held that the notice was received but dismissed the suit on the ground that the tenant was ready and willing to pay. The Appellate Bench reversed this decision, holding that the case fell under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act since there was no dispute as to standard rent or permitted increases and arrears exceeded six months, and decreed eviction. The tenant filed a writ petition challenging the appellate decree. The High Court analyzed the provisions of Section 12 of the Bombay Rent Act, noting that Section 12(3)(a) applies when there is no dispute as to standard rent or permitted increases and the tenant fails to pay rent within one month of notice, while Section 12(3)(b) applies only when there is a dispute. The Court found that the tenant did not dispute the standard rent or permitted increases in the written statement; he only denied receipt of notice and claimed readiness to pay. The Court held that mere readiness and willingness is not sufficient; the tenant must actually pay or tender the rent within one month of notice. Since the tenant did not pay the arrears within one month of the notice, the case fell under Section 12(3)(a), and the tenant was not entitled to the protection of Section 12(3)(b). The Court also noted that the tenant's subsequent deposit of arrears during the suit did not cure the default. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the eviction decree.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Eviction for Default - Section 12(3)(a) Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Applicability - Where there is no dispute as to standard rent or permitted increases and arrears exceed six months, the case falls under Section 12(3)(a) and not Section 12(3)(b) - The tenant's readiness and willingness to pay after notice is insufficient if rent is not paid within one month of notice - Deposit of arrears during suit does not cure the default (Paras 7-15). B) Rent Control - Eviction for Default - Notice of Demand - Section 12(2) Bombay Rent Act - Service of notice - The Trial Court found that the tenant received the notice dated 22 March 1982 - The Appellate Bench accepted this finding - The tenant's denial of receipt was not accepted (Paras 3, 7). C) Rent Control - Eviction for Default - Deposit of Rent - Section 12(3)(b) Bombay Rent Act - Inapplicability - Since there was no dispute as to standard rent or permitted increases, Section 12(3)(b) does not apply - The tenant's deposit of arrears under court order does not bring the case within Section 12(3)(b) (Paras 8-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court correctly reversed the Trial Court's dismissal of the eviction suit and decreed possession in favor of the landlord under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the decree of eviction passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court. The tenant was directed to hand over possession of the suit premises to the landlady.
Law Points
- Section 12(3)(a) Bombay Rent Act applies when there is no dispute as to standard rent or permitted increases and arrears exceed six months
- Section 12(3)(b) applies only when there is a dispute
- readiness and willingness to pay after notice is not sufficient if rent is not paid within one month of notice
- deposit of arrears during suit does not cure default under Section 12(3)(a).
