PUNJAB SINDH KSHETRA Vs. CHUNIA DEVI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aforesaid civil revisions under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Court Act 1887 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 17.09.2012 passed by Judge Small Cause Court/1st Additional District Judge, ishikesh in SCC Suit No. 28 of 2007 "Punjab Sindh Kshetra Rishikesh Vs. Smt. Chunia Devi and others".

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the revisionist- plaintiff Punjab Sindh Kshetra Rishikesh instituted the aforesaid suit against defendant-Smt. Chunia Devi and others, inter alia, on the ground that revisionist/plaintiff is a charitable trust registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860. Shri Raghuveer Lal Ghai is Manager/Trustee/Power of Attorney Holder of the said Trust. The predecessor of the defendants Late Tara Chand was inducted as tenant at Bhawan No.9, Advertand Marg, Rishikesh on property nos. 131 to 133 on 01.07.1956 on rent at the rate of Rs. 10 per month, as also on property nos. 135 and 136 on 01.06.1973 on rent at the rate of Rs. 10/- per month. The rent receipt of the property in question were issued separately. On the demise of Shri Tara Chand his legal heirs (defendants) become joint tenant over the property in dispute. The tenants also raised illegal construction and encroached upon some part of the land in question in the month of August-2007. Thereafter, a legal notice was issued by the plaintiff. After expiry of 30 days of notice, when defendants-tenants failed to pay the rent of the property in dispute to the plaintiff, the tenancy of the defendants was terminated by the plaintiff. Despite the demand of rent and other dues, the tenants did not pay the same to the plaintiff/landlord then the plaintiff/revisionist was constrained to file the suit against the tenants.

(3.) Defendants/tenants put their appearance and filed written statement (paper no. 13C) stating therein that they are tenants in the said property however other averments of the suit were denied by them. It is stated that no rent is due towards the defendants. It is further stated that they have not raised any construction over the suit property, therefore, their tenancy is protected under the provisions of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act No. 13 of 1972'). It is also contended that the plaintiff wants to let out the property in question on higher rent, therefore, the suit has been filed by it. It is also stated that the suit is not legally maintainable as Shri Ghai has no authority to institute the Suit. It is also stated that the rent is not due upon the defendants and on receipt of the notice they send the rent to the plaintiff through money order, but the same was not received by him. Thereafter, they deposited the amount of rent under Section 30 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972.