MISRI LAL Vs. 3RD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the tenant-petitioner. No one appeared for landlord respondents or their legal representatives in spite of sufficient service.

(2.) This is tenant's writ petition arising out of S.C.C. Suit No. 112 of 1979 filed by landlords-respondents Chandra Pal, Shrimati Mishri Devi and Shrimati Angoori Devi. Suit was filed before J.S.C.C. Aligarh. In the plaint it was stated that plaintiffs were the landlords and defendant-petitioner was tenant of the building in dispute, which was let out to him on 1.7.1978; that rate of rent was Rs. 200/- per month, that since the start of tenancy no rent had been paid and that tenant had made material constructions in the building in dispute. It was also stated in para 3 of the plaint that property in dispute had been taken on rent by the tenant for using the same as godown. It was no where stated in the plaint that eviction was also sought on the ground of inconsistent user. Tenant filed written statement stating therein that he had taken the accommodation in dispute on rent with effect from 1.10.1978 for residential purposes and that whatever changes and repairs had been made did not in any way disfigure the building or diminished its utility or value and that bath room and kitchen were repaired, water tank was placed and electric connection was installed as agreed between the parties. Tenant further pleaded that rate of rent was Rs. 60/- and not Rs. 200/- per month and that it was also agreed that the amount of Rs. 1000/- spent by the defendant in the repairs, minor changes and construction of water tank and installation of electric connection was to be adjusted from the rent @ Rs. 20/per month

(3.) Trial Court / J.S.C.C. Aligarh held that the rate of rent was Rs. 60/- per month. It was further held that tenancy started from 1.10.1978 and not 1.7.1978. In respect of default, trial Court held that after getting the notice of termination of tenancy and demand of rent on 29.1.1979, tenant sent the rent from October, 1978 till February 1979 through money order which was refused by the landlord, hence tenant was not defaulter. In respect of constructions and structural changes made by the tenant it was held that the said changes and alterations neither disfigured the building in dispute nor diminished its value or utility. One of the landlords i.e. Sri Chandra Pal appeared as witness. He stated that the tenant had started residing in the accommodation in dispute instead of using the same for godown. The trial Court through judgment and decree dated 5.12.1979 dismissed the suit for eviction and permitted the plaintiff to withdraw the amount deposited by the tenant.