SYED ASHRAF Vs. GUNEET KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 25.9.2006 which had endorsed the finding of the trial judge dated 29.7.2005 whereby the suit filed by the Plaintiff for recovery of possession of the suit property i.e. B-2/64, Ground Floor, Safdarjung Enclave along with damages had been decreed in her favour. Rate of damages had been modified.

(2.) Plaintiff is stated to be the owner of the suit property; she had let out the suit property to the Defendant vide lease agreement dated 01.10.1997. Rent of the property was 9500/- per month; it was payable in two parts i.e. 6000/- as rent and 3500/- towards her charges for fittings and fixtures. This agreement expired by efflux of time dated 31.8.1993. Defendant continued to hold over the premises; rent was not paid in terms of the lease deed. Plaintiff did not wish to continue with the tenancy; vide legal notice dated 20.2.2002 the tenancy was terminated w.e.f. 31.3.2002. This notice had been served at the Delhi address and Banglore address of the Defendant. Despite service of the said notice Defendant had failed to vacate the suit property. Accordingly the present suit was filed.

(3.) In the written statement, relationship of landlord and tenant was not disputed. It was not disputed that the rent was more than 3500/-. However, the receipt of legal notice was disputed. It was denied that the Defendant had received the aforenoted legal notice dated 20.2.2002 either at his Delhi address or at the Banglore address. It was stated that the AD card purportedly bearing the signatures of the Defendant is a forged and fabricated document. Tenancy had not been validly terminated.