KHURSHEED Vs. SILLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Faheem Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.V.S. Raghuvansi for the respondent.

(2.) Respondent-Landlord apart from oral evidence filed the application for permission of construction, copy of the house tax receipts, receipts for payment of electricity charges, copy of the notice terminating the tenancy and first assessment for 1995-2000 as documentary evidence. Tenant-petitioner apart from examining himself filed the money order receipt, challan form of depositing the amount as documentary evidence.

(3.) Trial Court after considering the evidence of the parties held that petitioner was a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 500/ - and the provisions of Act No. XIII of 1972 were not applicable as the shop was constructed in 1995. It was further held that since the provision of the Act are not attracted the tenant-petitioner is not entitled to benefit of Section 20(4) of the Act and the tenancy has been terminated by a valid notice. On the basis of the said finding the suit was decreed. Aggrieved by the order, tenant-petitioner went up in revision which was dismissed and the findings of the trial Court was affirmed.