MANISH KUMAR Vs. LAKSHMI NARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Yatindra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinod Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.

(2.) This is the petition by the tenant, challenging the order of the District Judge, Bulandshahar dated 2.5.2013 by which the revision filed by the petitioner against the order of the Judge, Small Causes Court dated 4.4.2012 has been dismissed.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts are that the respondent is the owner of the shop in dispute, which had been allotted to him in the year 1994 by the Bulandshahar Khurja Development Authority, which was newly constructed in the year 1994. The said shop had been let out to the petitioner in the year 1995 and since then the petitioner is carrying on the business in the said shop. In the year 2007, the petitioner filed Original Suit No. 280 of 2007 seeking permanent injunction that he may not be evicted except in accordance to law. The said suit has been decreed. The respondent issued notice dated 28.1.2008 terminating the tenancy of the petitioner. It was stated that the petitioner has not paid rent after May, 2007 and is in arrear. The said notice has been admittedly served upon the petitioner. When the petitioner did not vacate the premises and has not paid the rent, Suit No. 10 of 2008 has been filed for the arrear of rent, eviction and damages. The suit has been decreed by the Judge, Small Causes Court vide order dated 4.4.2012 against which the petitioner filed revision which has been dismissed. Both the courts below have held that since the construction was made in the year 1994, Act No. 13 of 1972 does not apply. It has been further observed that in Original Suit No. 280 of 2007, the petitioner, in his statement, has admitted that the rent was paid upto May, 2007. The plea of the petitioner that the rent has been subsequently remitted by money order has not been accepted on the ground that the petitioner was not able to produce any evidence to prove that the rent has been sent by money order. On these grounds, the revisional authority has upheld the order of Judge, Small Causes Court directing the petitioner to vacate the shop and further damages @ Rs. 3500.00 per month.