New Peking Chinese Hotel, Hyderabad v. Hindustan Builders, Hyderabad
1991-09-25
K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY, YOGESHWAR DAYAL
body1991
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : 1. Leave granted. 2. The High Court made the order of eviction on two grounds: (i) The building is reasonable and bona fide required for immediate demolition and reconstruction; and (ii) There was wilful default in payment of rent. 3. In these appeals, we are concerned only with the question of wilful default. Ordinarily, we would not interfere on this aspect when there is concurrent finding of fact. But the events in the case compel us to make an exception. 4. The agreed rent payable by the appellant-tenant is Rs.450/-. The High Court has determined the arrears on the basis of this rate. The tenant has denied the liability to pay the agreed rent since according to him there was reduction in the leased out portion after the respondent purchased the property. In support of this contention he wants to rely upon the order of the rent Controller fixing the fair rent at Rs.350/-. The fair rent has been fixed w.e.f. November 30, 1976. He also wants to rely upon the observation in that order stating that the tenant has been deprived of some area from her possession and her amenities were also cut short. The High Court, however, has excluded the fair rent order on the ground that it has not been admitted as an additional evidence. The High Court has also observed that it was irrelevant. 5. We have heard counsel on both sides and we are of the opinion that the order fixing the fair rent cannot be said to be irrelevant. It is a subsequent event which could not have been ignored by the High Court. 6. We, therefore, allow these appeals in part and set aside the finding of the High Court on the question of wilful default. The High Court shall now consider that question afresh in the light of the order fixing the fair rent. Rent of the judgment is kept undisturbed for the present and the High Court will revise it appropriately in the light of the fresh finding to be given on the question of wilful default. 7. We also make it clear that we shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on the question of wilful default. The stay of eviction shall continue till the disposal of revision by the High Court. No. costs.