SHAEEL AHMAD ALIAS SHEELU Vs. GEETA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the tenant-petitioner and Sri Shrey Sharma, learned counsel for the landlady-respondents and perused the record.

(2.) Present petition has been filed for setting aside the judgement and order dated 26.5.2018 passed by the District Judge in SCC Revision No. 4 of 2017 and the judgement and order dated 10.8.2017 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court in SCC Suit No. 18 of 2009.

(3.) SSC suit was filed by the landlady-plaintiff (respondent herein) on the ground that the rent of the disputed shop in question is Rs. 1,000.00 per month and since the construction is a new construction, therefore, the provisions of UP Act 13 of 1972 are not applicable and a valid notice was given but the rent was not paid by the tenant-defendant (petitioner herein), therefore, the landlady-plaintiff is entitled for rent and eviction of the tenant. The suit was defended on the ground that the tenant is not in arrears of rent and after receipt of notice, the amount due was deposited under Sec. 30 of the Act and therefore, there is no default in payment of rent. The trial Court framed five issues. On issue no. 1 it was found that the provisions of UP Act 13 of 1972 are not applicable. On issue no. 2 it was found that the rent is payable at the rate of Rs. 500.00 per month and not at the rate of Rs. 1,000.00 per month as claimed by the landlord. Issue no. 3 regarding misjoinder of parties was decided in favour of the landlord. Issue no. 4 was regarding default in rent and it was found that the tenant is not entitled for benefit of Sec. 20(4) of the Act. Ultimately the issue no. 5 regarding other reliefs was decided in favour of the landlord. Revision against the same filed by the tenant was dismissed by upholding the aforesaid findings.