LAWS(ALL)-2005-7-4

PREM SHANKER SRIVASTAVA Vs. IVTH A D J

Decided On July 22, 2005
PREM SHANKER SRIVASTAVA Appellant
V/S
IVTH A.D.J. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the tenant for quashing the judgment and order dated 19.9.1985, passed in Civil Revision No. 245 of 1982 whereby the respondent No. 1 allowed the revision filed by the respondents 2 to 4 and decreed the suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment.

(2.) The dispute relates to the portion of residential house situate in Mohalla Sumer Sagar, Gorakhpur City, Gorakhpur, of which the respondent before this Court is the landlord and the petitioner is the tenant. The petitioner having committed default in payment of rent the respondent after giving notice of demand and ejectment filed suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment which was registered as J.S.C.C. Suit No. 77 of 1981 claiming rent at the rate of Rs. 20 per month. The tenant petitioner contested the suit and alleged in the written statement that the rate of rent was only Rs. 10.50p. and that they had tendered the rent by money order after receipt of notice and therefore, there was no default and the suit be dismissed.

(3.) Both the parties led evidence and the trial court vide judgment dated 1.4.1982, held that the rate of rent was Rs. 10.50 per month and further that the tenant having tendered rent by money order, there was no default and dismissed the suit. The landlord respondent 2 to 4 filed revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, 1887 (in short referred to as 1887 Act) which was registered as Civil Revision No. 245 of 1982. The revisional court came to the conclusion that the trial court had ignored material evidence on record, thereby resulting into finding which could not be sustained. The revisional court relying upon the evidence (not considered by the trial court) came to the conclusion that the rate of rent was Rs. 20 per month and the tenant petitioner having not deposited at the said rate committed default and was liable for ejectment. It accordingly allowed the revision and decreed the suit of the respondent vide judgment dated 19.9.1985. Aggrieved by the same, the tenant has filed that present writ petition.