RAKESH KAKKAR Vs. SUBODH MOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions arising out of similar set of facts raises common questions of law, therefore, were heard and decided together by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioners-defendants filed these writ petitions against the judgment and order passed by the revisional Court whereby the revisional Court has dismissed the revision filed by the petitioners-defendants against the decree passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition are as under :

(3.) REGARDING issue No. 1 as to whether the plaintiff is the owner and landlord of the disputed property, the trial Court recorded finding that Smt. Shashi Agarwal was no doubt realizing the rent but the property belongs to undivided Hindu family and by virtue of partition decree passed in Original suit No. 817 of 1999 the accommodation in dispute fell into share of the plaintiff. After 30-9-1999 or after filing of the suit neither Smt. Shashi Agarwal has realized any rent nor any rent was paid to Smt. Shashi Agarwal. Smt. Shashi Agarwal as well as the plaintiff informed the respective tenants including petitioners in these writ petitions, that the plaintiff is landlord and owner of the accommodation in dispute and is entitled to realize the rent. Thereupon individual notice was given by the plaintiff to the tenants demanding the arrears of rent beyond 30th September, 1999 since the rent and arrears were not paid, the tenancy stand terminated.