BIR SINGH THAKUR ADVOCATE Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE DEHRADUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PREMISES No. 173-A, Bharat Insurance Building New Cannought Place, Dehradun admittedly are owned by respondent no. 3, Life Insurance Corporation of India. The aforesaid premises were let out admittedly to the petitioner on a monthly rent of Rs. 50.88 and the terms of the lease were also reduced to writing which is contained in Annexure C.A.-I to the counter affidavit.

(2.) AN application dated 22-1-1979 was given by the Life Insurance Corporation before the Estate Officer exercising the powers under the U. P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 on the ground that the petitioner illegally demolished portion of a wall between the two rooms in the disputed premises and inspite of telegraphic notice continued the work and opened a door in the wall thus substantially changed the shape of the premises and damaged it. It was also urged that despite service of the notice dated 21-8-1978 determining the tenancy of the petitioner, the premises have not been vacated and thus the petitioner has become unauthorised occupant of the premises in dispute. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and in pursuance of which objections were filed on 25th February 1980 denying the allegations made in the application.

(3.) IT has also been argued that in any view of the matter the lease granted in favour of the petitioner could have been determined for some reason and there being no reason for determination of the lease, the petitioner could not have become an unauthorised occupant within the meaning of the Act. Reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court reported in Shrimati Sushila Devi v. Rajya Sampatti Adhikari, 1984 (1) ARC p. 72.