LAWS(ALL)-2019-3-240

ATEEQ AHMED Vs. TAUSEEF HAIDAAR

Decided On March 13, 2019
Ateeq Ahmed Appellant
V/S
Tauseef Haidaar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27.4.2013 passed by Additional District Judge, Ex-cadre No. 3, Saharanpur whereby, SCC Suit No. 48/2011 instituted by the plaintiff respondents has been decreed for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent.

(2.) The suit was instituted by the plaintiff respondents with the allegation that the defendant revisionist is tenant of a shop and verandah (for short 'disputed premises') on a monthly rent of Rs. 1800/- per month plus 12% water tax. The provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are not applicable. He had defaulted in payment of rent since 1.1.2009. A notice dated 18.10.2011 was sent to him by registered post demanding arrears of rent and terminating his tenancy. The defendant revisionist refused to receive the notice. He also failed to pay arrears of rent, consequently, after expiry of thirty days from the date of service of notice, he became liable for eviction.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant revisionist by filing written statement asserting that he had been tenant of the disputed premises since the time of its erstwhile owner and landlord Anwar Abbas son of Syed Asgar Abbas on a monthly rent of Rs. 100/-. It was also asserted that the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (for short 'the Act') were fully applicable. The building, of which disputed shop is a part, was purchased by the plaintiffs by four registered sale deeds, all executed in July 2008. He claimed that plaintiff No. 1 (Tauseef Haidar) had realised rent till November 2011, but he did not issue rent receipts. He further pleaded that the entire alleged arrears of rent from 1.1.2009 including interest, cost, etc. as contemplated under Section 20(4) of the Act had been deposited and thus, he is entitled to benefit of the said provision.