Valid service of demand notice is crucial for eviction proceedings; tenants must ensure receipt to avoid eviction for non-payment of rent.

J U D G M E N T :

1 Applicants have filed this Civil Revision Application challenging the judgment and decree dated 19 September 2011 passed by the learned Judge of Small Causes Court decreeing RAE & R Suit No.971/1680 of 2001 and directing Applicants/Defendants to vacate the suit premises and to pay Rs. 2381.40 towards rent, property taxes and permitted increases for the period from 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2000. An enquiry into mesne profits from the date of filing of the Suit under Order 20, Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (the Code) it also directed to be conducted. The decree dated 19 September 2011 has been unsuccessfully tested before the Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court by filling Appeal No.103 of 2011. The Appellate Bench has however dismissed the Appeal by its judgment and decree dated 12 March 2021, which is also subject matter of challenge in the present Application.

2 Shop No.1 on Ground floor of the Building No.49, 2nd Lane, Manaji Rajuji Road, Kamathipura, Mumbai 400 008 admeasuring 21 square feet are the ‘suit premises’. Defendants' father was inducted as a monthly tenant in respect of the suit premises for carrying out tailoring business. After demise of the original tenant, Defendants, being his heirs, have been treated as tenants. The rent in respect of the suit premises, according to Plaintiffs, was Rs. 66.15 p.m. A notice dated 24 January 2001 was served by Plaintiffs on Defendants contending that they were in arrears of rent from 1 April 1993. Plaintiffs also claimed arrears of repair cess at the rate of Rs. 14.65 per month from 1 October 1994. Plaintiffs also demanded increase in the rent by Rs. 2.50 with effect from 1 April 1994 and further increase of Rs. 2.50 with effect from 1 April 1995 and 1 April 1996. Plaintiffs also demanded Rs. 15/- per month from 1st April 1996 towards property taxes. Plaintiffs also demanded increase in the rent at the rate of Rs. 3/- per month from 1 April 1997 and 1 April 1998. They demanded Rs. 11/- per month from 1 April 1998 towards property taxes. Plaintiffs also demanded increased rent by Rs. 3/- per month from 1 April 1999 and Rs.3.50 per month from 1 April 2000. Plaintiffs also demanded Rs.10/- per month being increase in the property tax from 1 April 2000. This is how Plaintiff demanded total amount of Rs. 135.80 per month from Defendants.

3 Plaintiffs instituted RAE & R Suit No.971/1680 of 2001 in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay on 5 November 2001. Plaintiffs sought recovery of the possession of the suit premises on the grounds of:

(i) arrears of rent, property taxes and permitted increases from 1 April 1993, (ii) illegal sub-letting, (iii) change of user, tailoring business to scrap material business, (iv) non-user without reasonable cause for continuous period of six months immediately preceding the date of filing of the suit, and (v) bonafide requirement.

4 Defendants resisted the suit by filing Written Statement. Both the sides led evidence in support of their respective cases. After considering the pleadings, documentary and oral evidence, the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court decreed the suit vide judgment and order dated 19 September 2011. The learned Judge upheld the grounds of arrears of rent, change of user, non-user and bonafide requirement. Applicants/Defendants were directed to handover possession of the suit premises to Plaintiffs. Defendants are also directed to pay amount of Rs.2,381.40 towards rent, property taxes and permitted increases for the period from 1 January 1998 to 31December 2000. The Small Causes Court also directed enquiry into mesne profits under Order 20, Rule 12 of the Code from the date of filing of the suit till delivery of possession of suit premises.

5. Applicants/Defendants filed Appeal No.103 of 2011 before Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court challenging the decree dated 19 September 2011. The Appellate Bench accepted the grounds of arrears of rent, change of user and bonafide requirement. The fin