RAM KUMAR Vs. A K TADAIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 4th of July, 1992 passed by the Additional District Judge, Lalitpur in SCC suit No. 5 of 1990 whereby the suit filed by the opposite party-landlord for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment from the shop No. 28/2 situate in Mohalla Subhashpura, Jhansi Sagar Marg has been decreed. The facts in brief are as follows: The aforesaid SCC suit No. 5 of 1990 was instituted by Abhinandan Kumar Tadaiya on the allegation that the defendant-tenants are in arrears of rent w.e.f. 14th of February, 1984 to 14th of June, 1990. They have failed to pay the arrears of rent in spite of notice of demand dated 9th of January, 1990 which was served on 12th of January, 1990. They have, thus, committed default in payment of rent and therefore, they are liable for eviction.

(2.) The suit was filed against three defendants. Out of them only the present applicant Ram Kumar contested the suit on the pleas inter alia that he is not in arrears of rent and the money was tendered after the receipt of notice. It was further pleaded that service of notice alone on him is not valid as the original tenant was his father Babu Lal and after his death the tenancy right has been inherited by widow and daughter of Babu Lal also.

(3.) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, as many as four issues were framed by the Trial Court. Under issue No. 1 the Trial Court has found that the defendant-tenant has failed to tender the rent in spite of service of notice of demand within the period of thirty days. Under issue No. 4 it was held that the notice was served on the contesting defendant-tenant and its non service on other defendants is of no consequence as they have come forward to contest the proceedings. Besides the above, it is the contesting defendant who alone is in occupation of the shop in question.