(1.) Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi holding brief of Sri Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant/tenant and Sri Ashish Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff/landlord.
(2.) This petition has been filed challenging the judgment dated 12.02.2014 in O.S. No.21 of 1998 (Dinesh Kumar v. Anand Kumar) passed by the Judge Small Causes Court/Civil Judge (S.D.), Kasganj, (Kanshi Ram Nagar) and the judgment dated 09.03.2017 in S.C.C. Revision No.4 of 2014 (Anand Kumar v. Dinesh Kumar) passed by the Additional District and Session Judge/Fast Track, Court No.2, Kasganj. FACTS:-
(3.) Undisputedly, the petitioner-defendant is a tenant of a shop situate in Mohalla Nathu Ram Bilram Gate, Kasganj of which the respondent-plaintiff is the landlord. Allegedly on account of default in part in payment of rent, a notice dated 24.06.1998 was issued by the respondent-plaintiff/landlord to the petitioner-defendant/tenant terminating tenancy and demanding arrears of rent and damages. According to the respondent-plaintiff/landlord, the arrears of rent were not paid and the disputed premises was not vacated by the petitioner-defendant as demanded by notice date 24.06.1998. Consequently, the respondent-plaintiff filed O.S. No.21 of 1998, which was decreed by the impugned judgment and decree dated 12.02.2014. The Judge Small Causes Court framed seven issues. On issue Nos.1 and 5 relating to tenancy, the Trial Court held that the petitioner-defendant was the tenant in the disputed shop on a monthly rent of L 475/-. The Trial Court further held that the petitioner-defendant had defaulted in payment of rent. While deciding issue No.4 relating to bar of the provisions of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972, the Trial Court held that the provisions of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 were not applicable for reason that the respondent-plaintiff has proved on the basis of Paper No.59-C/2 and the oral evidence that the shops have been constructed in the year 1992 since its assessment was made for the first time w.e.f. 01.04.1992. While deciding issue Nos.6 and 7 with respect to validity of notice and its service, the Trial Court came to the conclusion that the notice dated 24.06.1998 was validly served and thereafter the suit was filed after expiry of 30 days. The findings recorded by the Trial Court have been affirmed by the Revisional Court by judgment dated 09.03.2017 in S.C.C. Revision No.4 of 2014. Aggrieved with the impugned judgments dated 12.02.2014 and 09.03.2017, the petitioner-defendant/tenant has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. SUBMISSIONS:-
ABOUT US "REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD." is a Company incorporated in 1991 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. Since its inception to 1995, the Company was busy in carrying out the activities related to various Banks' Job Work..
Read More
Sales: sales@the-laws.com
Support: info@the-laws.com
8000853936
9376168072
27, 4TH FLOOR, Agrawal Center, Ashram Road, Income Tax, Ahmadabad 380014.
LOGIN