BASHIRUDDIN Vs. IIND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition arises out of a suit filed by the landlord respondent praying for a decree of ejectment of the defendants- petitioners from the premises in dispute under their tenancy and for recovery of an amount of Rs. 3535/- from them by way arrears of rent from 10-5-74 to 18-2-77 at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month besides recovery of the amount by way of mesne profit at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month. The suit had been filed on the ground that the defendants were defaulters within the meaning of section 20 of the U. P. Act No 13 of 1972 and inspite of the composite notice terminating the tenancy and demanding the arrears of rent having been served nothing was paid by the defendants, hence the suit. THIS suit was contested by the defendants on the assertions that they had not committed any default in the payment of rent and the plaintiffs were not entitled to any decree as claimed.

(2.) IT may be noticed that prior to the riling of the suit giving rise to the present writ petition, the landlord-respondent had filed a small cause suit being S. C. Suit no. 229 of 1970 wherein they had claimed a decree for the ejectment of the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants apart from the recovery of arrears of rent etc. This suit was decided on 28-5-73 and under the judgment and decree of that date the relief of ejectment of the defendants from the premises in dispute was refused but the plaintiff was found entitled to be amount of rent for which the suit was decreed specifying that the amount of rent for the period 31-5-73 had been deposited in court which could be withdrawn by the plaintiff and further indicating that the rent for the period beginning from 1-6-73 will be payable.

(3.) BESIDES this tape recorded conversation which allegedlly contained the admission of Prakash Chandra indicated above the petitioners tenants also produced expert evidence for proving that the receipt relied upon by them contained the signatures of Prakash Chandra. Apart from the above the petitioners tenants also led oral evidence to prove the payment rent and further to prove the tape recorded conversation as well as receipt to which a reference has already been made above