LAL CHAND Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the legal representative of Gian Chand, the original tenant who was sought to be evicted by the respondent-landlord in a regular civil suit for eviction filed in 1976. According to the landlord, the building was newly constructed in 1970, Gian Chand, the erstwhile tenant re-took possession in 1970, but that because of reconstruction, the building was exempt from the provisions of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 1972 Act) for a period of 10 years as mentioned in Section 2(2) of the Act. The new Act came into force on 15-7-72. The landlord gave notice for eviction in 1976 under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act terminating the tenancy and thereafter, he filed the present suit in 1976.

(2.) The tenant, Gian Chand contended that he was tenant from 1959 and that the building was reconstructed and the reconstruction was completed in 1970. He was occupying only a room earlier and though there was some new construction, the room occupied by him did not suffer any reconstruction and in any event, he was entitled to the protection which was available to him under the old Act of 1947.

(3.) Gian Chand was allotted the shop on rent by the Prescribed Authority under Section 7 of the United Provinces (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947, which was the authority to allot vacant premises on rent. Subsequently, Gian Chand accommodated the respondent-landlord by voluntarily vacating the room in his occupation, upon an understanding that he would be put back into possession after reconstruction. Therefore, after reconstruction, he was again inducted into possession as tenant. Gian Chand contended that he would continue to be a statutory tenant and, therefore, the exemption period of 10 years granted under the 1972 Act to a new construction would not be applicable in this case.