( 1 ) THIS is plaintiffs revision under S. 29 (2) of the Bombay rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the judgment and decree dated 29-1-1982 whereby the Third extra Assistant Judge, Baroda, dismissed the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 31-7-1980 passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, Baroda, dismissing the plaintiffs suit so far as it relates to recovery of possession.

( 2 ) THE necessary facts are that on 2-7-1977 the plaintiff-landlord filed a Regular civil Suit No. 338 of 1977 in the Small Causes Court at Baroda against the tenant for possession of the demised premises on the ground of default in payment of rent at the rate of Rs. 14. 00 per month plus 0. 50 ps. , for meter charges for the period 1-7-1975 to 31-3-1977 amounting to Rs. 294. 00 as rent plus Rs. 10. 50 ps. , as meter charges, in all totalling to Rs. 304. 50 ps. The plaintiff also claimed Rs. 29. 00 as mesne profit for the period 1-4-1977 to 31-5-1977. The standard rent of the premises was fixed at Rs. 14. 00 per month plus 0. 50 ps. , for meter charges in previous suit no. 58 of 1952 between the parties. The plaintiff served the tenant with a notice dated 6-4-1977 in accordance with the provisions of S. 12 (2) of the Act demanding the arrears of rent. The defendant neither replied to it nor paid the arrears of rent within one month of the service of notice dated 6-4-1977.

( 3 ) THE defendant filed written statement, denying that he was a defaulter in payment of rent. It was stated that the plaintiff gave notice on 3-10-1975 which was replied within one month, i. e. , on 1-11-1975. The rent was sent to the landlord by money orders on three occasions but the same were refused. The tenant deposited the entire rent due before the first date of hearing. He also filed an application under s. 11 (3) for fixation of the standard rent. No interim standard rent was fixed and the Court consolidated the miscellaneous application for fixing the standard rent with the suit for eviction.

( 4 ) THE trial Court held that though the defendant-tenant made some mistake in not replying the plaintiffs notice, his conduct shows that he was ready and willing to pay the rent which is evident from the fact that he deposited Rs. 304. 50 ps. on 27-7- 1977 the day on which the suit for recovery was filed by the plaintiff. Subsequently, he deposited Rs. 1,050. 00. The Court, therefore, passed a decree for payment of arrears of rent of Rs. 304. 50 ps. However, the trial Court refused to pass decree for possession as it found that the tenant was ready and willing to pay rent firstly by sending all rent by money orders till 30-11-1975 and thereafter by depositing all rent in Court before the first date of hearing. The Court also found that no interim standard rent was fixed and no order for payment of rent was made by the Court, pending the suit. The Court also held that the notice Exh. 22 was not valid notice as far as the demand of electricity charges were concenred. With respect to the standard rent, the Court fixed at Rs. 14. 00 per month plus 0. 50 ps. , as meter charges. In appeal so far as the notice is concerned, the Court reversed the finding of the trial Court and held that it was absolutely legal and valid. So far as the standard rent is concerned, the Court held that the rent was fixed at Rs. 14. 00 per month and 0. 50 ps. , as meter charges in the Regular Civil Suit No. 58 of 1952 by a compromise decree and therefore, the said issue was barred by res judicata and therefore, it was not open for the tenant to re-agitate the issue by way of application under S. 11 (3) of the Act. With respect to arrears of rent, the Court found that the defendant neither replied to the notice nor raised any dispute regarding the standard rent within one month or paid arrears of rent within a period of one month from the date of service of notice dated 6-4-1977 and therefore, he did not comply with the provi