DAMYANTI DEVI Vs. YOGENDRA KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision under Section 25 of the Provisional Small Causes Court Act is directed against the judgment and decree passed in Small Causes Suit No. 31 of 1988, decreeing the Plaintiff 's suit for arrears of rent and ejectment. The Plaintiff Yogendra Kumar Singh filed the suit with the allegation that he is the sole owner and landlord of the accommodation at building No. 356 Baghambari Grihsthan Yojna, Allahabad and the Defendant applicant is the tenant occupying the accommodation Rs. 250/ - per month, besides water tax and charges for the electricity consumed. The Plaintiffs stated in the plaint that the house in question was assessed for the first time by Nagar Mahapalika on 1 -4 -82. As such U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 is not applicable to the building in question.

(2.) THE Plaintiff served a notice dated 4 -7 -88 demanding the arrears of rent from the tenant besides the water charges and also for terminating the tenancy. A copy of the said notice is annexed as Annexure 5 with the counter affidavit filed by the landlord to the affidavit filed along with the stay vacation application. The Defendant contested the suit on the ground that she is occupying the accommodation since 1 -10 -1979 and the building in question was constructed in the year 1976, hence U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was applicable to the tenancy. The Defendant denied that the Plaintiff is the sole owner and landlord of the house in question. The suit at the instance of the Plaintiff was not maintainable. The Defendant pleaded that the accommodation in question was let out by Khajan Singh after executing a rent note and it was settled that the rent for the accommodation would be Rs. 250/ - p.m. besides Rs. 10/ - water charges and the electricity bill would be payable according to electric sub meter reading. It was also stated that since December 1987 the owner of the building refused to receive the rent hence the amount of rent was deposited under Section 30 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the court of Munsif West, Allahabad and the rent was being continuously deposited in the said account.

(3.) ISSUE No. 2, with regard to the applicability of the Act No. 13 of 1972 of the accommodation in question is one of the important questions for decision. It is admitted between the parties that the accommodation in question was let out to the Defendant since 1 -10 -1979 by Plaintiff's father Khajan Singh. The Defendant pleaded that the house in question was built in the year 1976 and that on the date of filing of the suit, provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972 would be applicable. The Plaintiff's case is that the building in question was assessed by the Nagar Mahapalika for the first time on 1 -4 -82, as such the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 would not be applicable.