ARVIND KAUR Vs. RAGHUVEER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant revision has been filed by the tenant Smt. Arvind Kaur against the landlord Raghveer Singh, challenging the judgment and order dated 22.5.2014 passed by the Small Causes Court/ Additional District Judge, Dehradun in S.C.C. Case no.7 of 2006, Raghuveer Singh v. Smt. Arvind Kaur. By the said judgment, the Trial Court has directed the revisionist to vacate the property, in question, as also to make payment of arrears of rent and mesne profits to the respondent -landlord.

(2.) THE property, in question, is the residential two -storey building which was let out to the tenant on 11.05.2004 for a period of eleven months at a monthly rent of Rs.6,700/ -, so agreed between the parties. This way, the agreement between the parties came to an end on expiration of period of eleven months viz. on 10.4.2005. The tenant did not vacate the building nor any fresh agreement was executed between the parties. So, the registered notice was issued by the landlord to the tenant on 11.1.2006 as required under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the T.P. Act'), asking him to vacate the building, in failure of which, he was impelled to institute the SCC Suit No.7 of 2006 on 1.3.2006 which was prolonged in the court below and could be decreed only after passing of eight years.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionist -tenant has argued that no plea or averment was ever raised either in the lease agreement or in the notice dated 11.1.2006 or in the pleadings of the plaint by the landlord regarding the non -applicability of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 [U.P. Act No.13 of 1972]. So, in that eventuality, the S.C.C. Suit was at all not maintainable in the Trial Court, as it did not entail any of the reasons which have been envisaged u/s 20 of Act No.13 of 1972.