APURVA JINDAL Vs. SUKHVINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court, is a landlord, who has put a challenge to the impugned Appellate Court's judgment, as it has been rendered by the court of 1st Additional District Judge, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Rent Control Appeal No. 11 of 2017, "Sukhvinder Singh Vs. Apurva Jindal", by virtue of which, the appeal preferred by the respondent/tenant, herein, was allowed, and as a consequence thereto, it had resulted into the setting aside of the order of the release dtd. 10/10/2017, as passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Junior Division) Kashipur, District Udham Sing Nagar, in the proceedings, which was registered as a PA Case No. 6 of 2017, "Apurva Jindal Vs. Sukhvinder Singh", under Sec. 21 (1) (a) of Act No. 13 of 1972.

(2.) The precise case of the landlord in the release application was, that the respondent happens to be under the tenant of the petitioner over the tenement in question, which was described as to be a residential accommodation lying in Mohalla Katoratal Ramnagar Road, Premdeep Hotel, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The "chaudahai" of the property under the tenancy of respondent was described in the release application itself. Apart from it, it has also come on record, that as far as the factum of relationship of the landlord and the tenant is concerned, it is a fact which is not disputed by either of the parties to the proceedings before the court below. It is contended by the landlord that the property in question was acquired by the landlord by virtue of registered deed of conveyance which was executed in their favour, and the said purchase was made by the landlord in order to meet up the need of the landlord himself, of the accommodation in question, which was under the occupancy of the respondent/tenant, which was bearing a rent of Rs.38.00 per month.

(3.) Prior to the termination of the tenancy, a notice as contemplated under proviso to sec. 21 (1) (a) was issued by the landlord on 7/11/2016, and thereafter a second notice by way of reminder was issued on 24/4/2015, contending thereof, that ever since issuance of the first notice, asking the respondent/tenant to vacate the premises in question, since he has not vacated the same within in the prescribed time limit therein in the notice, and he has committed the default despite of having a receipt of the notices, which was given for the termination of the tenancy, the release application was sought to be allowed, in order to meet up the personal need of the landlord. There had been a simultaneous proceedings which were held by way of the SCC suit being SCC Suit No. 1 of 2015, which was filed after the issuance of the notices on 24/4/2015, on the ground of default, and also for the purposes of attracting the provisions contained under sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 20 of the Rent Control Act, due to balance arrears of rent, and non timely remittance of rent.