ABDUL KADER v. G.D. GOVINDARAJ (D) BY LRS

A in Karani Properties ltd. v. Miss Augustine and Ors., AIR (1957) SC 309, the tenn 'rent' is comprehensive enough to include, all payments agreed by the tenant to be paid to his landlord for the use and occupation not only of the building and its appurtenances but also furnishing, electric installations and other amenities agreed between the parties to be provided by and at the cost of the landlord. It was very fairly conceded by learn.ed counsel for the . B appellant that ever since the decision of this Court in the case of Karani properties Ltd, the view being taken consistently by the High Court of Madras is that in the event of taxes having been agreed to be paid by the tenant, the same forms part of the rent . (To wit, see Messrs. Raval and Company v. K.G. Ramachandran (minor) and Ors., (1968) 2 MLJ 50. Thus, there is no C doubt that the amount of taxes which was agreed to by the tenant to be paid to the landlord was a part of the rent and the word 'rent' in Section I 0(2)(i) of the Act has to be construed accordingly. The suit filed by the landlord is preceded by a two months notice by the landlord served on the tenant demanding the payment of rent including D the amount of tax in arrears. The suit was filed after awaiting the fulfilment of the demand for the requisite period of two months. According to the Explanation, appended to sub-section (2) of Section I 0, the default to pay or tender rent shall be construed wilful if default in payment or tender continues after issue of two months' notice by the landlord for Clearing the arrears. This E Explanation came up for consideration of this Court in S. Sundaram v. V.R. Pattabhiraman, AIR (1985) SC 582 and held it was held that if despite notice, the arrears are not paid, the tenant is said to have committed a wilful default and he will be liable to be evicted forthwith. It has been further held that where the landlord chooses to issue two months notice and the rent is not paid that would be conclusive proof of the default being wilful unless the tenant proves his incapability of paying rent due to unavoidable circumstances. Needles to say, it is not the case of the tenant that there were any such unavoidable circumstances which had rendered him incapable of paying the rent. F For the foregoing reasons, no fault can be found with the view taken G by the High Court holding the tenant guilty of wilful default in payment of rent and hence, liable to be evicted under Section I 0(2)(i) of the Act. The appeal is held to be devoid of any merit and liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly. As there has been no appearance on behalf of the landlord-respondent, there shall be no order as to costs. H R.P. Appeal dismissed.