SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. MANVENDRA KUMAR CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) BY means of this writ petition moved under Art. 226 read with Art. 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 08.01.2010 (copy Annex. 13 to the writ petition) passed by Additional District Judge, Rishikesh, in SCC revision No. 23 of 2008, whereby said court allowed the applications 20C and 22C filed by the respondent (tenant) and remanded the case to the trial court.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the petitioner is landlord, and the respondent was his tenant. It is also clear that petitioner filed suit for eviction against the respondent alleging that the tenancy of the respondent stands terminated after serving a notice under section 106 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882. From the copy of the plaint (Annex. 1 to the writ petition) it is clear that it is pleaded by the petitioner (landlord) that provisions of U.P. Act, 13 of 1972, are not applicable to the case. From the copy of written statement (Annex. 2 to the petition) filed by the defendant before the trial court, it is evident that the respondent contested the suit mainly on the ground that after receiving the notice, an amount of Rs. 3,930/ - (Rupees three thousand and nine hundred thirty only) was sent by money order but the plaintiff refused to accept the same. It is also pleaded by the respondent in the written statement that he is entitled to benefit of provisions of Transfer of Property Act, 1882, regarding which it was argued before the court below that the respondent intended to refer protection under section 114 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882.