LAWS(UTN)-2008-2-14

SWAMI ONKARANAND DHARM SANSTHAN Vs. JITENDRA SINGH

Decided On February 19, 2008
SWAMI ONKARANAND DHARM SANSTHAN Appellant
V/S
JITENDRA SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Pankaj Kaushik, counsel for the revisionist and Shri M. L. Agrawal, counsel for the respondent.

(2.) BY the present civil revision filed under Section 25 of the Small Causes Court Act, the revisionist has prayed for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 4. 8. 2007 passed by the District Judge, Tehri Garhwal in S. C. C. suit no. 23 of 2006 and has sought the eviction of the defendant-respondent as well as for payment of arrears of rent and damages in respect of the property i. e. a shop at Onkaranand Bhavan Kailash Gate, Muni-ki-Reti, Tehri Garhwal. According to the plaint averments, the plaintiff namely Swami Onkaranand Religious Trust is a registered Trust office of which is situate at Muni-ki-Reti. The defendant is a tenant on the aforesaid property which was let out on a sum of Rs. 3,000/- by virtue of lease deed executed from 1-10-2005 to 30-9-2008 for a period of 3 years. According to the terms and agreement of the lease deed executed between the parties, the rent was to be paid in the first week of every month i. e. by 7th of that month. The plaintiff has stated that the defendant has failed to pay the rent from December, 2005 to July, 2006 i. e. Rs. 26,400/ -. He has also not paid the electricity charges. Hence, the notice was given on 21-6-2006 which was duly served upon the defendant on 27. 6. 2006 but the defendant has neither paid the rent nor vacated the premises in question. In paragraph 6 of the plaint, it has been stated that since the plaintiff is a charitable trust, therefore, U. P. Act no. 13 of 1972 is not applicable to the building in dispute. The plaintiff, therefore, has claimed the relief of arrears of rent to the extent of Rs. 26,400/- and thereafter he has claimed the damages at the rate of Rs. 110/- per day since 1-8-2006.

(3.) A written statement was filed by the defendant. In paragraph 19 a, it has been stated that the case no. 26 of 2006 is pending before the C. J. M. for the dishonour of the cheque. He has also stated that the rent was being paid by the defendant which was received by Shri Rajendra Singh Rawat which has been written in the diary of Shri Rajendra Singh Rawat.