The present Appeal is directed against this decision.
The Appellant deposited all the arrears of rent at the rate fixed by the Court for the period from 1 6 1976 to 31 1 1981 in the Trial Court on January 29, 1981, that is, within two days from the date of order fixing the rent.
Although the Appellant made applications on 24 12 1977, 15 1 1980, 9 12 1980 and 27 1 1981 for fixation of interim rent, the Trial Court passed an order only on January 27, 1981 fixing the interim rent at Rs.20 per month and gave directions to the Appellant to pay all the arrears of rent on or before February 10, 1981.
The Appellant thereafter deposited the rent in the Trial Court as set out in the following manner CNo.
The Respondent purchased the said house on December 3, 1976 and on the next day the previous owner of the said house informed the Appellant that the property was sold to the Respondent and the tenancy was attorned and further stated that the Appellant was in arrears of rent from 1.6.1976 to 30.11.1976.
On January 17, 1977, the Appellant sent a money order to the Respondent for the arrears of rent but the money order stated that the payment was being made to the Respondent as the Muktyar or agent of the previous landlord.
On an appeal by the Appellant, these findings were companyfirmed by the Additional District Judge, Satare and the appeal was dismissed.
Apart from the rent, a sum of Rs.2.20 per month was payable on account of Education Cess.
This money order was refused by the Respondent.
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.2.1987 of the Bombay High Court in W.P. No.
The issues in the said suit were framed by the Trial Court on September 12, 1978, and that is accepted as the first day of hearing of the suit.
Being aggrieved, the Appellant filed a writ petition, being Writ Petition No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
168, Bhavant Peth, Satara City in Maharashtra on an agreed rent of Rs.22 per month.
On January 11, 1977, the Appellant received a numberice from the Respondent dated January 10, 1977 demanding the arrears of rent from the Appellant.
1449 of 1987.
M. Tarkunde and S.C. Birla for the Appellant.
The Appellant took the tenancy of the premises in question, namely, shop in a house bearing CTS No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. This is an Appeal by a tenant against a decree for eviction passed against him at the instance of the Respondent who is the landlord.
B. Joshi and Janardan for the Respondent.
6028 of 1986.
In view of the short companytroversy before us, the relevant facts can be very briefly stated.
The Appeal has been preferred pursuant to Special Leave granted by this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
