NARENDRA CHANDRA DEO Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner prays for quashing the Judgment and order of the Additional District Judge, Mathura, dated 16.11.1977.

(2.) SHRI Dhar Chandra Das Shastri was owner of a house and the present petitioner Harendra Chandra Dev was its tenant. The landlord made a gift of the house to Shyamanand Sanskrit Vidyalaya Vrindaban on 13.9.64. Shri Dhar Chandra Das obtained permission of the District Magistrate under Section 3 of the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 (briefly the Act) for filing a suit for ejectment against the tenant (the petitioner). Shri Dhar Chandra Das and Shyamanand Sanskrit Vidyalaya filed suit No. 56 of 1966 in the Court of the Munsif Mathura for ejectment of the tenant (petitioner) on the basis of the aforesaid permission. That suit was withdrawn with permission to file a fresh suit and fresh suit No. 461 of 1966 was filed in that Court on the basis of that permission. That suit was dismissed on 13.12.1968 on the technical ground that Shyamanand Sanskrit Vidyalaya was not a registered body and no gift could be made in its favour. An appeal against this judgment was also unsuccessful. Thereafter Shri Dhar Chandra Das made a gift of the house in favour of Akhil Bhartiya Madhav Godeshwar Mahasabha, Vrindaban by a registered deed dated 16.3.1971. It was said that the Sanskrit Vidyalaya was under the management of the said Mahasabha. Shri Dhar Chandra Das and the said Mahasbha brought a suit for ejectment against the tenant (petitioner) on 21.5.71. This suit was brought on three grounds : first, on the ground of the permission dated 24.4.1966 which had been granted by the District Magistrate; the second ground was that the tenant was in arrears of rent and had not paid the same within the time prescribed by law after service of notice. The third ground was that the tenant had substantially diminished the value of the accommodation by causing damage to it. The tenant resisted the suit and challenged the validity of the gift-deed in favour of the aforesaid Mahasabha. He also contended that the permission granted by District Magistrate could not be used after the dismissal of the previous suit. The trial Court did not accept these contentions. It, however, held that second and third ground of arrears of rent and causing damage to the accommodation were not made out. It decreed the suit for eviction in view of the permission granted by the District Magistrate.

(3.) BY this writ petition the tenant has challenged the revisional order.