RAJ KUMAR Vs. MEER SINGH @ MEERU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal is directed against the judgment dated 04.03.2015, passed by the ld. ADJ-03,(South-West), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in RCA No. 14/14 tilted Raj Kumar V. Sh. Meer Singh @ Meeru, whereby the First Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant/ defendant. The said first appeal had been preferred by the appellant/defendant to assail the decree passed by the Trial Court in Suit No.255/2011, where the Trial Court had decreed the suit for recovery of possession, damages and mesne profits in favor of the plaintiff/ respondent vide judgment dated 30.05.2014.

(2.) The respondent/ plaintiff is the owner of property bearing No. 18, Vinoba Enclave, Main Bahadurgarh Road, CRPF Camp, Jharoda Kalan, New Delhi and the appellant/ defendant was inducted as a tenant in respect of one shop (suit property) in the aforesaid property at the monthly rent of Rs. 2,000/-, exclusive of electricity and other charges in January 2005. The rent was enhanced to Rs.2,500/- in January 2007, and thereafter from January 2010, the rent was enhanced to Rs. 3,500/- per month, excluding electricity and water charges. The appellant/ defendant stopped paying rent from the month of February, 2010, and thereafter stopped paying water and electricity charges as per his consumption. Consequently, the plaintiff/ respondent terminated the tenancy of the appellant/ defendant vide notice dated 03.03.2010, thereby calling upon the appellant to pay arrears of rent up to February 2010, and also to hand over the vacant peaceful possession of the suit property on or before 31.03.2010. On non-compliance of the notice, the respondent filed the suit for recovery of possession, arrears of rent, damages/ mesne profit and permanent injunction against the appellant before the Trial Court. Upon being summoned, the defendant/appellant filed his written statement contesting the claim of the plaintiff.

(3.) In his written statement, the defendant did not dispute the relationship of landlord and tenant between him and the plaintiff, but contended that he was inducted as a tenant in July 2001, and not in January 2005. He also contended that the initial rent was Rs. 600/- and not Rs. 2,000/- as averred by the plaintiff. The defendant averred that the rent was increased from time to time, and the same was lastly increased to Rs.950/- per month. The defendant further denied that in January 2007 the rent was increased to Rs. 2,500/- per month, and that in January 2010, the same was increased to Rs.3,500/- per month. The defendant has further denied all claims made by the plaintiff in the plaint.