ANIL KUMAR Vs. RADHEY SHYAM BHATIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant/ tenant.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the order dated 25.05.2017 in S.C.C. Case No. 29 of 2015 (Radhey Shyam Bhatiya and others v. Anil Kumar) passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Muzaffarnagar, whereby, the application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) C.P.C. being paper no. 15-C filed by the petitioner-defendant was rejected and the amendment application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. being paper no. 18-C was allowed. Facts:

(3.) Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the plaintiffs-respondents are family members who are owners and landlords of shop nos. 124/1 and 124/2, Bhopa Road, Muzaffarnagar of which the defendant-petitioner is the tenant. The plaintiff-respondent no. 3 is the son of the plaintiff-respondent no. 1. The tenancy was created by a registered lease deed for 11 months which fact has been admitted by the defendant-petitioner in para 3 of his written statement. The term of lease as per the lease deed was to expire on 30.06.2015. On account of alleged non payment of rent since August 2014, the plaintiffs-respondents by notice, terminated the tenancy and demanded to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the disputed shops on 30.06.2015 and also to pay arrears of rent. However, the defendant-petitioner neither vacated the disputed shops nor handed over its vacant possession to the plaintiffs-respondents. Therefore, on 15.07.2015 the plaintiffs-respondents filed S.C.C. Case No. 29 of 2015 (Radhey Shyam Bhatiya and 2 others v. Anil Kumar) in the court of Judge, Small Cause mentioning description of the plaintiffs as under: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_8_LAWS(ALL)9_2017.jpg</IMG>