JAG MOHAN AGARWAL Vs. KANCHAN KUMARI JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Sudeep Harkauli, learned counsel for respondent.

(2.) Present petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner-defendant submitted that premises in question is a Nazul/Lease land given by the State Government/Nagar Nigam, therefore, under the exception of Sec. 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act No. 16 of 2021'), Act No. 16 of 2021 would not be applicable in this case. Though this objection was not taken against the application filed by respondent-plaintiff for fixation of interim rent, but petitioner-defendant has raised the same while filing recall application and without considering the same, recall application has been rejected under the of provisions of Sec. 34(8) of Act No. 16 of 2021. He firmly submitted that once Act No. 16 of 2021 is not applicable, all proceedings under the provision of Act No. 16 of 2021 are void ab-initio. In the present case, remedy before the landlord is to file SCC Suit under the Provisions of Provincial Small Causes Court Act, 1887(hereinafter, referred to as, 'Act of 1887').