FAISAL KHWAJA Vs. SHEIKH YUNUS ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Heard learned counsel for the tenant petitioner and Shri Manish Tandon, learned counsel for landlord-respondent.

(2.) This revision is directed against judgment and decree dated 12.2.2013 passed by Judge Small Causes Court/Additional District Judge, Court No. 9, Kanpur Nagar in S.C.C. Suit No.5 of 2010 directing eviction of the tenant. Property in dispute is three rooms house situate at Parade, Kanpur rent of which is Rs. 1000/- per month. Property belongs to wakf hence by virtue of Sec. 2 (1) (bbb) of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 the Act does not apply. Accordingly question of default is not at all relevant. The first argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that Wakf Board should have filed the suit Mutwalli appointed by Wakf Board is quite competent to seek eviction of tenant of wakf property. In such suit wakf Board is not to be a party. In this regard learned counsel for respondent has cited S.M.H. Mutwalli Masjid Vs. A.D.J., 2012 (1) A.R.C. 820 .

(3.) The other argument is that tenant was entitled to protection of Sec. 114A of the Transfer of Property Act. In this regard an authority reported in 1993 A.C.J. 1045 has been cited. I have thoroughly considered the said authority along with other authorities in Vinod Kumar Rastogi Vs. Additional District Judge, 2003 (2) A.R.C. 377 . In the instant case neither there was an agreement between the parties that tenancy would be terminable on default nor tenancy was terminated on that ground. Accordingly there is no error in the impugned judgment and decree.