ARUN KUMAR Vs. VIIITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE BADAUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition was dismissed by me vide order dated 8.3.2002 for the reasons to be recorded later on. Now here are the reasons for dismissing the writ petition.

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the respondent Smt. Sudha Devi is admittedly the landlord of the premises which is under the tenancy of the petitioner, Arun Kumar. The respondent filed a suit after serving a notice i.e., SCC Suit No. 14 of 1995 on the allegation that the petitioner-tenant has not paid the rent w.e.f. 1.2.1994 till 25.4.1995 and has not paid the arrears of rent Rs. 7400/-. A notice dated 25.4.1995 was sent by the landlord through her Counsel by registered post which has been received by the petitioner-tenant. It is further stated in the plaint that it has been agreed upon by the tenant at the time of letting out the shop in dispute that apart from the rent agreed, the petitioner-tenant shall be liable to pay house and water tax whatever may be imposed by Nagar Palika from time to time. Petitioner-tenant apart from the arrears of rent has also not paid water tax which was Rs. 1920/- and has been realised by the Nagar Palika from the landlord and thus till March, 1995 an amount of Rs. 2880/- became due on account of payment of taxes and in July, 1995 it became Rs. 3040/-. Inspite of notice dated 25.4.1995 being served and tenancy having been terminated, the aforesaid amount towards arrears of rent Rs. 8000/- upto June, 1995 and damages for use and occupation for the month of July and August, 1995 have become due. The relief in the suit was asked for that the suit be decreed for eviction of the petitioner-tenant and thereafter handing over the possession to the plaintiff-respondent No. 2 a decree for a sum of Rs. 8000/- towards the arrears of rent w.e.f. 1.2.1994 to 31.5.1995 passed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No. 2 and a further decree for a sum of Rs. 1000/- towards the damages for use and occupation w.e.f. 1.6.1995 to 31.7.1995 and a decree for sum of Rs. 3040/- towards the arrears of house and water tax up to 31.7.1995 including the expenses for notice be decreed. For the further damages a decree be passed for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from the date of filing of the suit till the date of decree.

(3.) IT is further stated by the petitioner-tenant that the tenancy is regulated under the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The trial Court has found that the tenancy has been terminated by a valid notice issued under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act and suit was decreed. The trial Court decreed the suit that the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are not applicable to the tenancy in dispute and the tenant is liable to be evicted and sum of Rs. 8000/- towards the arrears of rent and Rs. 1000/- towards the damages and for water tax Rs. 3040/- and suit was decreed further mesne profit at the rate of Rs. 500/- from the date of institution of the suit till possession was delivered.