MAHAFUJ ALI Vs. REHANA KATHOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Kirti Kumar Nirkhi, learned counsel for the revisionist.

(2.) The present S.C.C. Revision has been filed against the order dtd. 8/4/2021 passed by Additional District Judge/F.T.C., Court No. 52, Kanpur Nagar in S.C.C. Suit No. 6 of 2018 (Smt. Rehana Kathoon Vs. Mahafuj Ali).

(3.) The defendant/revisionist is tenant of the plaintiff/respondent and there is residential accommodation as well as a shop in tenancy of the defendant/revisionist. On institution of suit for recovery of arrears of rent etc., and eviction of the defendant/revisionist, he filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 C.P.C. stating that a composite notice u/s 106 of the Transfer of Property Act regarding the residential and commercial accommodation is not in accordance with law. Further it has not been stated in the plaint that how the provisions of The U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972') will not apply to the property in dispute which was rejected by the trial court by the order dtd. 8/4/2021 under challenge.