ANOOP MAHESHWARI Vs. THOMAS T. KURIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Ishir Sripat, learned Advocate appearing for revision applicant and Shri Nipun Singh, learned Advocate assisted by Shri Naman Agarwal, learned counsel for opposite party.

(2.) A very short question arises for consideration of this Court in this revision application filed by the tenant petitioner, as to whether a small cause suit instituted for ejectment was maintainable in the face of the fact that tenancy agreement between the parties has been result of a written agreement entered on 27/8/2016 giving effect for a period of eleven months to run from 1/9/2016 to 31/7/2017 and which contained an arbitration clause vide clause 11 providing for arbitration between the parties in the event of any dispute arising out of the agreement of tenancy.

(3.) Facts are, since the tenancy was to end on 31/7/2017, the landlord first issued a notice on 1/5/2017 asking the tenant petitioner to vacate the premises in question on or before 15/7/2017 and handover the keys to the landlord. However, this notice was subsequently superseded by another notice dtd. 13/5/2017 asking the tenant petitioner to vacate the tenanted premises on 31/7/2017 i.e. the date on which the tenancy was to come to an end as per the agreement. Since the petitioner tenant raised dispute by giving reply on 29/7/2017 to the effect that there was an understanding reached between the parties that the agreement though orally was to last for ten years but in writing it was only for eleven months subject to renewal, the very notice to vacate the tenanted premises in question and handover the keys was untenable. As the tenant-petitioner did not vacate the premises, SCC suit was brought in by the landlord respondent.