LAWS(ALL)-1986-3-40

DHARAMPAL TYAGI Vs. ANIL KUMAR

Decided On March 17, 1986
Dharampal Tyagi Appellant
V/S
ANIL KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Defendants' civil revision Under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act against the judgment and decree dated 18th February, 1986 passed by the Vlth Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad in SCC suit No. 27 of 1985. The facts necessary for the decision of this Civil Revision are that the Plaintiff -Respondent is the landlord of shop No. 76 Nav Yug Market, Ghaziabad and the applicant is its tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 400/ - that a sum of Rs. 200/ - was the unpaid rent for the period ending 4th March, 1984 that thereafter no rent had been paid by the applicant and after setting off the amount paid in advance a total sum of Rs. 4640/ - was due against the applicant. According to the Plaintiff -Respondent the Defendant was also liable to pay electricity charges and Rs. 1000/ - was payable by him on that account. He also claimed damages after the date of the termination of tenancy at the rate of Rs. 800/ - per month. In regard to his claim for ejectment the case of the Plaintiff -Respondent further was that the provisions of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) were not applicable. The suit was contested by the applicant. He asserted that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, that the Act was applicable to the shop in question and that the assertion of the Plaintiff -Respondent that the applicant was in arrears of rent or electricity charges was erroneous. He also denied service of any notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act upon him. The parties produced evidence in support of their respective cases and on a consideration thereof the court below decreed the suit for ejectment as also for realisation of arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 4640/ - and electricity charges amounting of Rs. 1000/ -. A decree for damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 800/ - per month was also passed. It is this decree against which the present revision has been preferred.

(2.) AS regards the findings on issues 1, 2 and 3 namely whether the relationship of landlord and tenant was established between the parties ; whether the provisions of the Act are applicable to the shop in question ; and whether the Defendant had committed default in payment of the amounts claimed by the Plaintiff -Respondents, suffice it to point out that the findings in this regard recorded by the court below are essentially findings of fact based on appraisal of evidence and nothing has been brought to my notice so as to justify interference with those findings in the present civil revision.

(3.) IN regard to the finding of the trial court on issue so. 3 namely, whether the tenancy of the Defendant -applicant has been legally terminated under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, it has been urged by counsel for the applicant that no notice Under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was proved to have been served on the applicant. Consequently no decree for ejectment could have been passed against him. In this connection reliance for the Plaintiff -Respondent, has been placed mainly on four documents apart from the deposition of the Plaintiff made before court below. Copies of these four documents have been filed in the present revision by the parties along with affidavits. These four documents are: (1) copy of the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, dated 13th March, 1985 ; (2) copy of the postal receipt dated 13th March, 1985 indicating that a letter was sent by register post to Dharampal, proprietor M/s. Bharat Property Dealer, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad (3) copy of receipt indicating that letter was sent under certificate of posting on 13th March, 1985 addressed to Duarampal, proprietor, M/s Bharat Property dealer, Navyug Market, 1st floor Ghaziabad l4; copy of letter dated 26th July, 1985 written on behalf of Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Ghaziabad Division addressed to Sri Rameshwar Dayal, Advocate, Civil Court, Ghaziabad in reply to his complaint on behalf of the applicant about non -receipt of the acknowledgment due form in regard to the notice dated 13th March. 19o5 sent to the applicant by Registered post under postal receipt No. 1432 dated 13th March, 1985.