MOHAN LAL SAH Vs. SHANTA BISHT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated 30.11.2011, passed by Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Nainital, in rent control case no. 01 of 2007, Smt. Shanta Bisht and another vs Mohan Lal Sah, as also judgment and order dated 05.04.2014, passed by II Addl. District Judge, Nainital, in rent control appeal no. 04 of 2012, Mohan Lal Sah vs Smt. Shanta Bisht and another. A further prayer has also been made for directing the respondents not to evict the petitioner during the pendency of present writ petition.

(2.) Briefly put, the dispute relates to a shop which is part of property no. 64, situated in ward no. 7, Mallital, Nainital. Property no. 64, ward no. 7, was owned by late Sri Dhyan Singh Rawat, who had purchased the said property vide registered sale deed dated 15.11.1979 from one Harish Sah s/o Sri Devi Lal Sah. Petitioner is the tenant in the shop in dispute since the days of previous owner Sri Harish Sah and after execution of the sale deed in favour of late Sri Dhyan Singh Rawat, the petitioner became the tenant of late Dhyan Singh Rawat. Petitioner continuously paid the rent to late Sri Dhyan Singh Rawat after November 1979. Late Sri Dhyan Singh, in April 1981, gave the property no. 64, situated in ward no. 7, Mallital, Nainital to his daughter Km. Swarnlata Rawat. It is pertinent to mention here that late Sri Dhyan Singh, on 16.04.1981, wrote a letter to this effect to Tax Superintendant Nagar Palika, Mallital, Nainital and requested him to issue the receipt of the house tax or bills in the name of Km. Swarnlata Rawat, to whom late Sri Dhyan Singh had given the said property. In support of the aforesaid application dated 16.04.1981, other legal heirs of late Dhyan Singh gave 'no objection' in writing to the effect that if the property no. 64, ward no. 7, Mallital, Nainital, is transferred in the name of Km. Swarnlata Rawat, they will have no objection. Thereafter, on 25.06.1981, the Municipal Board, Nainital took a decision, whereby the name of Km. Swarnlata Rawat was recorded in municipal records over the said property. After June 1981, the petitioner, who was the tenant in shop in dispute, which is a part of property no. 64, ward no. 7, Mallital, Nainital started paying rent to Km. Swarnlata Rawat treating her as owner and landlord (landlady) of the shop in dispute. On 11.04.1990, Km. Swarnlata Rawat vide registered sale deed sold a shop which is part of said property in favour of Johri Dutt Chaudhary. Petitioner has been paying rent continuously to Km. Swarnlata Rawat treating her as owner and landlord (landlady) of the shop in question, in which the petitioner is running a medical shop in the name and style of 'Mohan Co. Medical Store'.

(3.) In the year 1996, a sham family settlement was done among the legal heirs of late Sri Dhyan Singh, by which the property in question was given to Smt. Shanta Bisht w/o late Sri Harish Bisht. Said family settlement was done only to make out a case for release of the disputed shop in favour of son of respondent no. 1, who is the married sister of respondent no. 2. Petitioner had continuously paid rent to Km. Swarnlata Rawat through cheque and money order, upto July 2007. Thereafter, respondent no. 2, started refusing to accept the rent and the petitioner was compelled to file misc. application no. 09 of 2008, Mohan Lal Gangola vs Km. Swarnlata Rawat, under Section 30 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for brevity here-in-after referred to as 'U.P. Act no. 13 of 1972') in the court and started depositing the rent in the court. In the year 1993, respondent no. 2 had moved an application for enhancement of rent before Rent Control and Eviction Authority, Nainital, which was registered as case no. 06 of 1993, Km. Swarnlata Rawat vs Mohan Lal Sah, and subsequently, the aforesaid case was dismissed in default of respondent no. 2 on 21.04.1994. In January 2007, respondents moved an application under Section 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act no. 13 of 1972, for release of shop in dispute on the ground that the son of respondent no. 1 needs the shop in question to run a business and want to open a departmental store. Aforesaid application was registered as Rent Control Case no. 01 of 2007, Smt. Shanta Bisht and another vs Mohan Lal Sah, in the court of Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Nainital. Notices were issued to the petitioner and the petitioner filed his objection to the release application on 07.11.2007. Respondents filed their rejoinder affidavit denying the averments made in the objection filed by the petitioner. Both the parties filed their affidavits and documentary evidence before the Prescribed Authority, in support of their respective claims. Prescribed Authority, on 30.11.2011, passed an order, whereby the application filed by the respondents was allowed and the petitioner was directed to vacate the shop in question within two months of the date of order.