MANOJ KUMAR Vs. XTH ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. U. Khan, J. At the time of hearing no one appeared for contest ing respondent hence only the arguments of learned Counsel for petitioner were heard. This is landlord's writ petition.

(2.) PROPERTY in dispute is one room with attached latrine bath room, rent is Rs. 46/- per month and Rs. 6/- per month is payable as water tax. Landlord filed S. C. C. suit No. 283 of 1990 against tenant respondent No. 2, Santosh Kumar Srivastava. JSCC (II) Kanpur Nagar decreed the suit for eviction and arrears of rent through judgment and decree dated 18. 9. 1995 against which S. C. C. Revi-sion No. 175 of 1995 was filed which was allowed by Xth A. D. J. , Kanpur Nagar through judgment and order dated 02. 09. 1998. Revisional Court set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs. The said judgment of the Revisional Court is challenged through this writ petition.

(3.) AS far as service of notice is concerned, landlord filed carbon copy of letter issued by Chief Post Master, Kanpur regarding service of notice. According to the said letter registry No. 4959 dated 5. 3. 1990 was given to the addressee on 14. 3. 1990. Copy of notice was also filed by the landlord. In the said copy two addresses of the tenant were mentioned, one was residential and other was of the place where tenant was doing service. The letter of Chief Post Master, Kanpur related to the registry sent on the office address of the tenant. The lower Revisional Court on the basis of surmises held that there was possibility that the receipt clerk of the office in which tenant was working (Leyland Central Workshop Rawatpur), may have received the notice and not given the same to the tenant. The lower Revisional Court only held that there was possibility that tenant may not have received the notide.