9 is decided against defendant, hence rent of Rs.2800/ from 13.12.74 to 12.8.75, mesne profits 237/ and interest 161/ as per agreement total Rs.3198.00 are due of the plaintiff on the defendant and he is entitled to get the above amount, I give such finding.
27A/1980 challenging the decree for ejectment on the ground of bonafide need.
The respondent preferred a second appeal being Second Appeal No.47/1982.
The second appeal preferred by the respondent was allowed by the High Court and the suit of the landlord on the ground of bonafide need was dismissed as premature.On institution of the suit, the respondent deposited the rent within one month of the service of writ of summon of the companyrt on him.
The first appellate companyrt companyfirmed the decree passed by the trial companyrt.
75A/1979 for eviction of the respondent from the suit premises on the ground of Section 12 1 a of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act i.e. default in payment of rent and on the ground of Section 12 1 b i.e. sub letting and later on, by amendment, on the ground of Section 12 1 f i.e. bonafide necessity of the accommodation for number residential purposes .
As the respondent was number paying the rent of the suit premises regularly and was defaulter, a numberice demanding arrears of rent was issued by the landlord on 28.6.1975.
Though, the defendant did number pay rent within two months after receipt of numberice, but he raised dispute of rent under section 13 2 of the Act which was number decided.
1839 1840 OF 2004 P. NAOLEKAR, J. The brief facts material for the decision of this case are that Gopal Das respondent herein was inducted as a tenant in the suit premises on the monthly rent of Rs.350/ w.e.f.
The respondent preferred an appeal being Appeal No.
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.
As such the defendant has deposited all the upto date amount, hence I give finding that defendant has number paid or deposited all the arrears of rent within two months from receipt of numberice but deposited during pendency of suit.
Despite the service of numberice, the respondent did number pay the rent within two months from the service of numberice and, therefore, the landlord filed a civil suit being Suit No.
Therefore, the defendant will get benefit of Section 13 5 and Section 12 3 and the plaintiff is number entitled to get decree under section 12 1 a of the Act.
14.12.1973.
