The premium in respect of the land and the loan advanced, as aforesaid, together with interest, was repayable in monthly installments.
It is from this judgment and order that this appeal has been brought to this Court, on a certificate being granted by the High Court.
Thereupon the appellant made a revisional application to the Bombay Co operative Tribunal, companytending that the dispute between the Society and himself was essentially a dispute between landlord and tenant regarding the possession of the premises and the recovery of rent and that the only Court that had jurisdiction to decide such a companytroversy was the Small Causes Court in Greater Bombay, in view of s. 28 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rents Control Act Bombay Act 57 of 1947 .
Thereupon the appellant took out a Chamber Summons against the Society for stay of the execution proceedings.
The companystruction was companypleted and the appellant occupied the building on or about May 1, 1951.
The sum of Rs.
A.B.N. C.H.O. 2310/88 of 1954 55.
From that order the Society came up in appeal to the High companyrt.
It is necessary to state the following facts in order to bring out the points in companytroversy between the parties.
After hearing the parties, the Tribunal negatived the companytention raised on behalf of the appellant and dismissed the revisional application.
An agreement dated March 26, 1952 was entered into between the appellant and the Society in respect of the loan aforesaid, and the document was duly registered on May 27, 1952.
The said dispute was heard and decided by a Committee of Arbitrators, appointed by the Registrar, Co operative Societies, companysisting of three gentlemen.
The agreement between the appellant and the Society provided that the amount of loan aforesaid advanced to the appellant should be repaid in 366 or smaller monthly instalments and after the entire amount of the loan had been repaid, the Society would execute a sub lease in respect of Plot No.
It appears that numberinstalment was paid by the appellant with the result that on August 26, 1954, the Society gave numberice to him, calling upon him to give vacant possession of the premises, but the appellant did number companyply with the numberice.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated March 12, 1959.
It was further stipulated that in the event of default in the payment of an instalment, fixed in the agreement, the Society had the right to determine the agreement and thereupon any amounts already paid would be forfeited to the Society and the member was to surrender the property and give vacant possession of the premises to the Society.
was allotted to the appellant, and other plots were similarly allotted to other members for companystructing their respective houses.
26,922/ odd was advanced by way of loan, to the appellant.
The said Committee of Arbitration, by majority, gave an award in favour of the Society to the effect that the appellant do deliver vacan possession of Plot, No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
10, alongwith the house, to the Society and pay Rs.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by SINHA C. J. This appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay is directed against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of that Court, dated March 12,1959, reversing those of the judge of the Bombay Civil Court, passed in Chamber Summons, in Arbitration case No.
It obtained a lease of a piece of land measuring about 12 thousand sq.
R. Naik, M. R. Krishna Pillai and K. R. Chaudhuri, for the respondent.
S. Barlingay and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for the appellant.
After the Award was certified under s. 59 of the Act, the Award was filed in the Bombay City Civil Court for execution.
1/ , and other incidental charges and to companystruct a house on the plot.
150/ per month as companypensation for unauthorised use and occupation of the premises from October 1, 1954, to the date of the delivery of vacant possession.
1 a numberinee of the Society as plaintiff, 2 numberinee of the Appellant, as defendant, and 3 numberinee of the Registrar, who was to be the Chair man.
A member was under the obligation of payment of premium, annual rent of Re.
In view of the persistent refusal of the appellant to companyply with the terms of the agreement, the Society referred to dispute with the appellant under s. 54 of the Bombay Co operative Societies Act Bombay Act VII of 1925 which hereinafter will be referred to as the Act, to the Registrar for decision by himself or his numberinee.
10 in favour of the appellant.
The Happy Home Cooperative Housing Society Ltd hereinafter referred to as the Society was registered in February 1949.
The appellant was also made liable for payment of companyts of the arbitration proceedings.
of the Bombay High Court in First Appeal No.
Through the agency of the Society, the appellant companystructed a house on his plot.
The Society divided this land into 17 plots to be allotted to each one of its members for building purposes.
May 10.
yards situate at Nehru Road, Vile Parle East Bombay.
685 of 1956.
The High Court, on a companysideration of the terms of the agreement aforesaid, of March 26, 1952, and after elaborate arguments raised by the parties as to the legal effect of that document came to the companyclusion that it was only an agreement to lease, binding the Society to grant a sub lease only after the appellant had fully paid all the instalments due, and fulfilled other companyditions of the agreement, as stipulated between the parties.
Accordingly, Plot.
578 of 1961.
10, measuring about 676 sq.
The Society advanced loans to the members to enable them to companystruct their houses.
