RAJ NARAIN Vs. HARI NARAIN AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicant. None is present on behalf of the opposite party even in the revised list. The present revision has been filed under section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act against the judgment and order dated 11th of December, 1986 by the IInd Additional District Judge, Fatehpur in S.C.C. Suit No. 11 of 1981. The Court below has decreed the suit so far as recovery of arrears of rent is concerned, but dismissed the suit for ejectment. The only point, therefore, mooted in the present revision is whether the Court below was right in dismissing the suit for ejectment or not.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff applicant was that the shop in question is a new construction and the suit has been filed within 10 years from the date of the construction. It was stated that the shop in dispute was assessed for the first time on 22nd of September, 1979. The Court below has found that besides the above assessment, there are other assessments of the building on record. These assessments relate to the assessment of the year 1969 (Ext. 12). The another assessment is of the year 1976 (Ext. 13). The Court below has also found that the map was got sanctioned in the year 1962 and thereafter, admittedly, the plaintiff applicant has raised some constructions, in the deposition, the plaintiff could not explain the extent of the construction raised earlier. The Court below after examination of the evidence on record has concluded that the plaintiff has not been able to prove that the first assessment of the shop in question is 22nd of September, 1979. The learned Counsel for the applicant in spite of his best effort could not point out any legal infirmity or perversity in the order under revision.