AZAD AHIRWAR Vs. JAI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Achyut Jee, learned counsel for the petitioner. By means of present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, petitioner has questioned the judgment and decree passed by the Judge Small Causes dtd. 15/12/2021 in SCC Case No. 24 of 2013 directing for eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises and also for arrears of rent and damages. The said order having been unsuccessfully challenged in revision. The final judgment passed in revision dtd. 2/11/2024 in SCC Revision No. 45 of 2021 is also under challenge before this Court.

(2.) The main plank of arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that findings returned qua issue no. 2 as to the applicability of Act no. 13 of 1972 is against evidence on record and hence perverse. It is also submitted that on the question of deposit under Sec. 30 that was made by the petitioner under Act No. 13 of 1972 has been negatived only on the ground that Rule 21(5) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Rules, 1972 was not followed. This According to learned counsel for the petitioner as far issue regarding rent deposited under Sec. 30 runs contrary to the issue no. 1 and hence judgment and decree deserves to be reversed.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the records, as far as issue no. 2 is concerned, I find there to be no dispute as such to jural relationship between petitioner and landlord respondents. The petitioner is more aggrieved by the decision made by trial judge as to issue no. 2 by which Act No. 13 of 1972 has been held as not applicable to the premises in question.