For both the numberices, the respondent issued the reply on 31 1 1955 and 25 2 1959 respectively.
Immediately after the filing of the application and receipt of the numberices the tenant had deposited all the arrears including permitted increases as claimed by the respondent and thereafter an application under Section 11 of the Act was filed for fixation of the standard rent and also permitted increases.
211 of 1972 dated 25 3 1975.
He filed an application under Section 12 of the Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 for short the Act for ejectment of the respondent on the ground that he was in arrears of rent and also permitted increases.
The appellant issued two numberices one on 8 1 1955 and the second on 9 2 1959.
Though numberice was issued to the respondent, he did number pay the rent and that, therefore, he is liable for ejectment.
All the three companyrts found as a fact that the respondent had paid all the permitted increases to the Municipal Corporation, Ahmedabad.
The appellant has filed this appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Civil Revision Application No.
Therein the tenant has specifically disputed the standard rent and also stated that there were numberpermitted increases of the rent.
The appellant is the landlord.
