DHARAM BIR PRASAD GUPTA Vs. VED PRAKASH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A very interesting question of law has arisen for consideration in the instant appeal : Whether the fiction in Section 106(1) of The Transfer of Property Act 1882 over -rides Section 107 thereof?

(2.) THE factual backdrop in which the issue has arisen is that the appellant took on rent, for manufacturing purposes, the suit property from the respondent. A rent deed was executed between the parties on 7th April 1997 creating a tenancy for a period of 3 years, but unfortunately for the parties, neither was the document drawn up on a stamp paper of adequate value nor was it registered.

(3.) ACCORDING to the respondent, the appellant failed to pay any rent thereafter and on 10.10.2006, by a registered notice, the tenancy was determined. According to the respondent, after the tenancy was determined vide notice dated 10.10.2006, possession of the appellant qua the suit property became that of an unauthorized occupant requiring the appellant to be ejected from the suit property and liable to be directed to pay damages for unauthorized use and occupation post 10.10.2006.