( 1 ) ). THIS is a Civil Revision Application under S. 29 (2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short the "act"), filed by the original defendant challenging the correctness, legality and propriety of judgment dated 14th September, 1987 rendered by the appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad in Regular Civil appeal No. 143 of 1981, whereby the said Appellate Bench was pleased to dismiss the appeal filed by the original defendant and confirm the judgment ex. 46 dated 25th March, 1981 rendered by the learned Judge of the Small causes Court, Court No. 12 at Ahmedabad (who will be referred to hereinafter as the learned Judge of the trial Court) in H. R. P. Suit No. 4896 of 1977.

( 2 ) ). Here in this Civil Revision Application, Revision Petitioner was an original defendant and Revision Opponent was an original plaintiff in the suit being H. R. P. Suit No. 4896 of 1977 before the trial Court, and therefore, for the sakeof convenience parties will be referred to as plaintiff and defendant respectively at appropriate places.

( 3 ) ). The facts leading to this present Civil Revision Application, in a nutshell, are as follows :- the plaintiff is an owner of suit property bearing Municipal Census No. 448/21 situated in Doctors Chawl, Gomtipur near Usha Talkies in the City of Ahmedabad. When plaintiff purchased the said suit property, the defendant was already therein as a tenant in the said suit property. After purchase of suit property by the plaintiff, he informed about the suit property having been purchased by him to the defendant. It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant is a tenant in the said suit property for monthly rent at the rate of RS. 10/ - and tenancy month is according to English Calendar month. It is the case of the plaintiff that defendant is a tenant in arrears of rent for more than six months and that defendant has neglected to make payment of such rent due for more than six months within one month after service of suit notice under s. 12 (2) of the Act. As per the case of the plaintiff, as on date of notice dated 22nd September, 1977, defendant was in arrears of rent for the period from 7th October, 1974 to 21st September, 1977. Therefore, he, by addressing a suit notice dated 22nd September, 1977, terminated the tenancy of the defendant and called upon the defendant to hand over the possession of the suit property. On receipt of suit notice, the defendant replied the said notice and in that reply, he denied the title of the plaintiff over the suit property, and thereby the defendant has committed a breach of terms of tenancy, and therefore, also defendant is not entitled to retain possession of the suit property. Thereafter, plaintiff filed h. R. P. Suit No. 4896 of 1977 in the Court of the learned Judge of the trial court on or about 1st December, 1977, wherein he prayed for a decree of eviction of defendant from suit property directing the defendant to hand over the possession of said suit property and also for a money decree to recover rs. 368/- being an amount of arrears of rent calculated for the period from 7th October, 1974 to the date of the suit. He also prayed for other consequential reliefs in that suit.

( 4 ) ). The defendant appeared and contested the suit by filing his written statement Ex. 13, wherein he has practically denied all the pleadings of the plaintiff pleaded in the plaint of the suit. In written statement also, the defendant has contended that the plaintiff is not his landlord and there is no relationship of the landlord and tenant between plaintiff and himself and hence the plaintiff has no right to file the suit. As per the case of the defendant, the previous owners were Shri Yadukant S. Dave and Chandrakant S. Dave and that previous owners have not given him any attornment notice either oral or in writing. It is his case that he is a tenant of Yadukant S. Dave, and therefore, plaintiff is not entitled to claim a