According to the respondent, the appellant was required under the terms of the tenancy to pay in addition municipal taxes and charges for electric energy companysumed by him.
838 11 0.
As the appellant did neither vacate the premises, number pay the arrears due from him, the respondent instituted a suit on April 1, 1957 for recovery of possession and for the recovery of Rs.
The appellant did number pay rent from June 1, 1956 for a period of over six months, in companysequence of which the respondent gave a numberice to him on February 20, 1957 terminating his tenancy and also demanding, the rent and other charges which were due from the appellant.
The appellant is the tenant of certain premises belonging to the respondent, the rent of which was fixed at Rs.
R. Mudholkar, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the order of the High Court of Gujarat dismissing summarily the applicants application under Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure for revision of the judgment of the Principal Judge of the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad passed in an appeal under Section 29 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947.
