NAGENDRA DUTT THAPLIYAL Vs. SUNDAR SINGH PANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the rival contentions, it transpires that the landlord Mr. Nagendra Dutt Thapliyal has come up in this revision challenging the judgment and order dated 6.8.2009, passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court in SCC Suit No. 2/2007, whereby the suit of the plaintiff was rejected for the relief of eviction, all the same it was decreed for the arrears of rent to the tune of Rs. 25,000/-.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsels of both the parties and feel that stress has been mounted up by the respondent's Counsel for the lack of service of the notice sent by the landlord under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. On this score, I found that such notice was duly served because although the roadside shop along with a dwelling rear portion was taken on rent by Mr. Panwar way back in July 1990, but it seems that by passage of time, as his son grew up, the latter succeeded his father in the shop and Mr. Panwar commenced to work as a Labour Supervisor in Rishikesh. This fact is proved by the statement of PW1 Sanjay Chauhan that Mr. Sundar Singh Panwar was engaged in such capacity w.e.f. April 2002 to February 2008 in his establishment M/s Kailash Hillways Engineering Associates and such factum has been accepted by the defendant.

(3.) Service of notice has been evaded by returning the same and such factum has been proved by PW2, the postman itself.