JUDGMENT

Phukan, J.-The landlord filed an application under Items (i) and (ii) of sub-clause (3) of Clause 13 of The Central Provinces and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 (for short the Order ) before the Controller which was allowed and the controller granted permission to the landlord to serve the notice of eviction on the tenant. The appeal was dismissed by the Resident Deputy Collector, Amravati and the writ petition filed by the tenant was also dismissed in limine.

2. The landlord pleaded before the controller that the tenant was a monthly tenant since 1961 and rent was to be paid on the first day of every month according to English calendar. It is also pleaded that the tenant was a habitual defaulter in payment of rent. The appellant-tenant pleaded before the Controller that rent was to be paid as per his convenience and he was neither a habitual defaulter nor defaulted in payment of rent. Both the authorities below on facts held that it was a monthly tenancy and also came to the finding that the tenant was a habitual defaulter and defaulted in payment of rent. The present appeal is by the legal representatives of the original tenant.

3. It has been urged before us that the tenant was neither a habitual defaulter nor was in arrears of rent.

4. We quote below items (i) and (ii) of sub-clause (3) of clause 13 of the Order :-

"13. (1)-No landlord shall, except with the previous written permission of the Controller :-

(a) -give notice to a tenant determining the lease or determine the lease if the lease is expressed to be determinable at his option; or

(3)-If after hearing the parties the Controller is satisfied:-

"(i)-that on the date of filing the application the tenant was in arrears of rent for any aggregate period of three months and that he failed to deposit with the Controller the amount of arrears ordered to be deposited by the Controller within such time as may be fixed by him; or

(ii)-that the tenant is habitually in arrears with the rent; or

(iii) ......................... .................................

(ix) .........................

he shall grant the landlord permission to give notice to determine the lease as required by sub-clause (1)."

5. Clause 13 of the Order prohibits a landlord from serving a notice for eviction on the tenant except with the previous written permission of the Controller and such permission can be given if the landlord can make out any one ground mentioned in the said Clause. In this appeal grounds alleged are item Nos. (i) and (ii) of sub-clause (3) of Clause 13 quoted above.

6. The word habitual occurring in item (ii) have not been defined in the Order.

7. The meaning to the words habit and habitually as given in The Law Lexicon (Second Edition) by P. Ramanatha Aiyar s is:-

"Habit-Settled tendency or practice, mental constitution. The word `habit implies a tendency or capacity resulting from the frequent repetition of the same acts. The words by `habit and `habitually imply frequent practice or use."

"Habitual-constant; customary; addicted to a specified habit."

8. This Court in Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors.1 considered the question of habitual criminal and in paragraph 31 the expression habitually was explained as follows:-

"The expression `habitually means `repeatedly or `persistently . It implies a thread of continuity stringing together similar repetitive acts. Repeated, persistent and similar, but not isolated, individual and dissimilar acts are necessary to justify an inference of habit..........."

9. Therefore, the expression habitual would mean repeatedly or persistently and implies a thread of continuity stringing together similar repeated acts. An isolated default of rent would not mean that tenant was a habitual defaulter.

10. As directed by this Court the application and written statement filed by the parties before the Controll