HARDEEP KAPOOR Vs. RAJESH VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The regular first appeal under Sec. 96, Code of Civil Procedure seeks to assail the judgment and decree dtd. 30/11/2019 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohini Courts, New Delhi in C.S.No.420/2017. Vide the impugned judgment, the respondent/plaintiff's suit for possession of the property being, LIG Flat No.QU-4B, First Floor, Pitampura Delhi-110034, arrears of rent w.e.f., 1/1/2016 along with interest @7%, has been decreed by the Ld. Trial Court.

(2.) The common case of the parties is that the suit property was let out by the respondent in favour of the appellant. While it is the respondent's case that the appellant was inducted as a tenant pursuant to a rent agreement dtd. 8/1/2010 on a monthly rent of Rs.8,000.00, which rent was subsequently increased to Rs.13,000.00 per month, exclusive of water and electricity charges, it is the appellant's case that the rent agreement was an oral agreement with a monthly rent of Rs.2,000.00. It is the respondent's case that since the appellant started defaulting in the payment of rent and water charges w.e.f., 1/1/2016, his tenancy was terminated vide a legal notice dtd. 29/11/2016. The respondent, while calling upon the appellant to vacate the suit property, also demanded a sum of Rs.1,43,000.00 from the appellant towards arrears of rent for the period between 1/1/2016 to 30/11/2016. However, since, despite service of the legal notice, the appellant failed to vacate the suit property, the respondent preferred a suit seeking suit for possession and permanent injunction along with arrears of rent of Rs.1,43,000.00 and mesne profits @ 15,000/- per month.

(3.) The appellant defended the suit by filing a written statement, wherein besides urging that he had regularly paid the monthly rent for the period between December, 2016 to July, 2017 by depositing the same before the Ld. Rent Controller, Rohini Courts, New Delhi, it was averred that since the appellant had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000.00 as interest free security to the respondent, the monthly rent between the parties was fixed at Rs.2,000.00 with a further condition that the tenancy would continue for an indefinite period and the rate of rent would not be increased in the future. It was the appellant's further plea that the rent agreement between the parties was oral and the agreement dtd. 8/1/2010 was a forged and a fabricated document.