SMT. MEENA AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT. PRAMODANI AWASTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30.3.2016 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court on an application under Order 15, Rule 5 C.P.C.

(2.) Admitted facts of the matter are that the opposite party, claiming to be the landlord of the suit property served a notice dated 6.2.2014 upon the petitioner for determination of tenancy. The notice was duly served upon the defendant/petitioner. The defendant replied to the notice on 14.2.2014. After service of notice, eviction suit was filed with the assertion therein that the tenant is in default of rent from the month of Oct. 2013 and a notice dated 6.2.2014 for determination of tenancy was served upon him.

(3.) Despite service of notice, the tenant neither paid the rent due nor handed over the vacant possession of the suit property and, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to damages for use of occupation of the building and, further, the defendant is liable to be evicted. In the said suit, written statement was filed by the defendant/petitioner on 30.7.2014.