RAM DEV TYAGI Vs. AKHTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who was the plaintiff in the court below, was unsuccessful in his attempt to get the respondent ejected from the land measuring 150 sq. yards with construction of tin shed existing thereon and two shops on the road forming part of Khasra No. 292, Near Dhan Mill, Chhattarpur, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the suit property) of which he claims to be the owner. He further claims that he had let out the suit property to the respondent herein (defendant in the suit) at a monthly rent of Rs. 6500/- per month excluding all other charges. His suit for ejectment and recovery of Rs. 2,42,500/- has been dismissed with cost by the learned ADJ, vide judgment and decree dated 29.11.2004. This appeal is his pursuit to get the order from this Court.

(2.) NARRATION of facts which led to the dispute between the parties would not require much space. The appellant had served notice dated 12.7.2002 upon the respondent terminating the tenancy by the midnight of 31.8.2002 and the respondent was required, by the said notice, to hand over actual physical possession of the premises by the said date. The respondent did not vacate the suit premises. The appellant treated the respondent as a trespasser with effect from 1.9.2002 and filed the suit in question. In the plaint, the appellant averred that the respondent was very irregular in making payment of rent and had not paid rent since January, 1999. The rent for 35 months had also become due which figure was computed at Rs. 2,27,500/-. Damages were demanded @ Rs. 15,00/- per month with effect from 1.9.2002 which was the demand raised in legal notice dated 12.7.2002 as well as the respondent was asked that in case he did not vacate the premises, he would have to pay damages at that rate with effect from 1.9.2002.

(3.) ON the basis of the pleadings, the learned trial court framed the following issues: