DIWAKAR SINGH Vs. SHAKUNTALA DEVI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastav, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vipin Sinha, Advocate for the petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) Petitioner's suit for ejectment of respondent-tenant was dismissed by Trial Court i.e. Small Cause Court/Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bareilly vide judgment dated 21.7.1998 observing that though petitioner became owner of disputed premises w.e.f. 24.5.1990, in respect to rate of rent the respondent-tenant has successfully proved that it was only Rs. 225/- per month at the relevant time and that she has deposited the said rent in the court in accordance with law. The findings recorded by Trial Court has been affirmed by Revisional Court vide judgment dated 28.10.1999.

(3.) Though before Revisional Court, petitioner took a plea that once petitioner has became owner and this fact was known to the tenant, rent ought to have been paid to petitioner-landlord and not to Smt. Urmila Devi, mother of petitioner and this show that there was default on the part of tenant but this contention has been negated by Revisional Court affirming findings of fact recorded by Trial Court on this aspect, as mentioned in para 6 of revisional order, observing that nothing perverse was shown by petitioner before Revisional Court. Before this court also counsel for petitioner has reiterated the same argument without placing any cogent evidence to show that tenant has not validly deposited the rent in the Court and therefore, liable for eviction for default in payment of rent.