A landlord can seek eviction from a joint tenant for non-payment of rent, provided the demand notice covers the entire tenanted premises.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

THE CHALLENGE

1. Revisionary jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under provisions of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the Code) for setting up a challenge to the judgment and decree dated 30 September 2022 passed by Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court by which A1 Appeal No. 335 of 2015 filed by the Applicants has been dismissed. Cross-Objection filed by the Plaintiffs is also dismissed. Small Causes Court's decree dated 14 March 2014 decreeing R.A.E. Suit No. 648/1112 of 2001 has been confirmed. The Small Causes Court, while partly decreeing the suit, has held Plaintiffs to be entitled for decree of eviction of Defendants from the suit premises.

FACTS

2. Plaintiff-Haji Esmail Haji Essa Supariwala, who claims to be the owner and landlord in respect of the building named ‘Supariwala Mansion’ (previously known as Sofia Manzil) situated at Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Road, Parel, Mumbai-400012. It appears that Mr. Bahman Jehangir Irani and Mr. Rustom Gustasph Irani were operating Restaurant business in the name of style as 'Cafe Yazdan' in Shop Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the building Sofia Manzil. By Indenture dated 20 June 1952, said Bahman Jahangir Irani and Gustasph Irani sold and assigned their business inclusive of stock-in-trade, furniture, fixtures, fittings, pots, pans and all other movables lying in the said shops together with the goodwill in the business in favour of Ms. Maria Paulin Annes. This is how Ms. Maria Paulin Annes started claiming tenancy rights in respect of the premises where the bakery was being operated. After death of Maria Paulin Annes, her children, son Archibald Annes (Archibald) and unmarried daughter-Ricardia Annes (Ricardia) claimed joint tenancy rights in respect of premises bearing Shop Nos. 1, 2 and 3, staircase room and CI shed (larger premises) and the rent receipt was apparently issued in their joint names. It is claimed that Ricardia allowed one Ganekar Tailor in front portion of Shop No. 1 while retaining rear portion of Shop No. 1 in her possession. According to Ricardia, after her retirement as a Teacher from St. Agnes High School, she established a Travel Agency by name Marian Travels in Shop No. 3 prior to the year 1974. It appears that business of Studio was stated by Ricardia and Archibald in Shop No. 2 and in rear portion of Shop No. 1. The license in respect of Studio business was obtained in the name of Archibald. After death of Archibald, his second wife Genarosa Archibald Annes (Genarosa) apparently conducted the business of studio and had employed Manager-Mr. Ashok Ramprakash Anand for looking after the studio.

3. The Manager of Studio, Mr. Ashok Ramprakash Anand, filed S.C. Suit No. 6411 of 1981 seeking injunctive reliefs in respect of the Studio against Genarosa, in which Genarosa filed a counterclaim seeking recovery of possession of Shop No. 2 and rear portion of Shop No. 1. In that suit, Court Receiver was appointed, through which Genarosa secured interim possession of Shop No. 2 and rear portion of Shop No. 1 as an agent of Court Receiver.

4. Ricardia had filed RAN Application No. 47/SR of 1987 in Small Causes Court against landlord seeking fixation of standard rent in respect of the larger premises. In the said RAN Application, landlord filed Reply denying tenancy in respect of staircase room and CI shed and contended that the rent had increased up to Rs.986/- by 1 April 1993. It appears that in the said RAN Application, Ricardia was permitted to deposit rent from 1 July 1991 till 31 October 1995 at the rate of Rs.586.27/- per month. The ledger relied upon by the Revision Applicants in said RAN Application No. 47/SR of 1987 indicates deposit of rent of Rs.586.27/- in respect of larger premises upto April 1997.

5. Disputes arose between Genarosa and Ricardia in respect of the studio business and Ricardia got aggrieved by Genarosa securing possession of Studio through Court Receiver appointed in SC Suit No. 6411/1981. Ricardia therefore filed