L BISHAMBER SAHAI Vs. SOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a decree-holder's appeal arising out of a dispute between the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor in execution of a decree for eviction of the judgment-debtor from certain premises. It appears that on the 13th of July, 1945, the decree-holder who had let out the premises to the Respondent sent a notice claiming Rs. 428/- as arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 12/- a month and asking the Respondent to vacate the premises and deliver possession on the termination of the tenancy as mentioned in the notice. This notice was served on the 14th July, 1945 on the Respondent. Nothing was paid nor was the premises vacated and a suit was filed on the 1st October, 1946 which was decreed after contest, both for arrears of rent and for ejectment. The Defendant had pleaded that the property belonged to another person and that rent had been paid to him. This was disbelieved. This decree was passed on the 8th of April, ly46.

(2.) When the decree was in execution U.P. Act III of 1947 came into existence and it was made applicable as from the 1st October, 1946. An objection was taken by the judgment-debtor Respondent that having regard to the provisions of Section 14 read with Section 3 of the said Act, the decree could not be executed. The trial court over-ruled the judgment-debtor's objection but in appeal the lower appellate court allowed the objection of the judgment-debtor so far as it relates to eviction. In this appeal Learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that all the requirements of Section 14 of Act III of 1947 are satisfied and the lower appellate court has erred in upholding the objections of the judgment debtor as valid.

(3.) Section 14 of the Act reads as follows: