UNION OF INDIA Vs. CHANDRA KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ashok Mehta, learned Addl. Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Tarun Agrawal, learned Central Government Counsel for the defendants/ petitioners and Sri P.K. Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri M.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the plaintiffs/ respondents/ landlords.

(2.) This petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:

(3.) Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the respondents are the owner/ landlord of the building situated at Kotla Road, Firozabad in which the petitioners/ defendants were tenant and were running the Head Post Office, City Firozabad at a monthly rent of Rs. 85/-. Water tax was to be additionally paid by them. Respondents/ plaintiffs/ landlords sent a notice dated 02.01.1987 by registered post to the petitioners/ defendants on account of non payment of arrears of rent since 01.11.1987 and making structural alteration in the building without permission of the landlords which diminished its value and utility. Arrears of rent was demanded. According to the plaintiffs/ respondents, the arrears of rent was not paid. Consequently, the defendants/ plaintiffs/ landlords filed SCC Case No. 08 of 1989 before the Prescribed Authority/ Civil Judge (J.D.), Firozabad. The said case was decreed by judgment and decree dated 07.03.2005. Aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment and decree, the petitioners/ defendants filed SCC Revision No. 02 of 2005 which was allowed by judgment and order dated 13.05.2010 and the order of the Prescribed Authority was set aside on the ground that the notice determining the tenancy is invalid. The respondents/ plaintiffs/ landlords filed Writ - A No. 48771 of 2010 to challenge the order of revisional court dated 13.05.2010. The writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 29.08.2016. The order of the District Judge, Firozabad in SCC Revision No. 02 of 2005 dated 13.05.2010 was quashed and the matter was remanded to the revisional court for decision afresh in accordance with law. By the aforesaid order, this Court held the notice to be valid.