SALEEM Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE MUZAFFARNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for Respondent 3 who is the real contesting respondent finally and are disposing of this appeal by their consent by this judgment.

(3.) The appellant is the tenant and Respondent 3 is the landlord. We will refer to them as the tenant and landlord in the latter part of this judgment for the sake of convenience. The landlord filed a suit from which the presentproceedings arise in 1991 on the ground that the relevant provisions of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act 13 of 1972 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Rent Act") did not a apply to the suit premises which is a shop occupied by the tenant who is carrying on his profession as a barber. The rent of the shop is Rs 350. 00 per month. It is the contention of the landlord that the disputed shop is newly constructed and it was first assessed to house tax on 1/4/1982 under order of the Municipal Board dated 20/3/1982. The suit shop is situated in Village Kandhala in District Muzaffamagar in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The contention of the landlord was that as the Rent Act was not applicable for a period of 10 years from the date of first assessment of the shop and as the tenant was in arrears of rent, he was liable to be evicted. For that purpose, he had served a notice to him demanding the rent and terminating the tenancy on 16/8/1991 which was served on him on 17/8/1991. The defendant in spite of the service of the said notice neither paid the rent nor vacated the premises and committed the default. Hence the suit.