RUCHIRA VINAYAK Vs. IIND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's writ petition. Suit filed by the landlord/respondent for eviction of the tenant petitioner has been decreed by both the courts below on the ground that the Rent Control Act (U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972) does not apply to the building in dispute by virtue of Notification No. S.R.O. 17.2.1982 and no ground of eviction as mentioned in Section 20 (2) of the Act is necessary to be proved by the landlord. The house in dispute which is in the form of an out house of a bungalow is situate within the cantonment limits of Meerut. Earlier the petition was allowed through Judgment dated 13.12.1996 and matter was remanded to the Revisional Court to determine the question of applicability of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972. However, the Supreme Court through judgment dated 19.8.1997 delivered in S.L.P. No. 8378 of 1997 reversed the Judgment of the High Court and remanded the matter to the High Court for deciding the said question itself.

(2.) IN exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Cantonment (Extension of Rent Control Laws) Act. 1957 and in supersession of the notification dated 1.9.1973 (S.R.O. 259) Central Government through notification S.R.O. 47, dated 17.2.1982 extended to all the cantonments in the State of U. P., U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 with certain modifications mentioned therein. Two notifications of 1.9.1973 and 17.2.1982 are substantially similar with minor difference, which are not relevant for the decision of the instant case.

(3.) BY virtue of Section 2 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 the said Act does not apply to the building mentioned under the said section. Through aforesaid notifications of September, 1973 and February, 1982, Clause (cc) has been added to Clause 2 (1) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which is as follows : '(cc) Any building within the cantonment, which is or may be appropriated by the Central Government on lease under the Cantonment (House Accommodation) Act, 1923.'