SRI CHUNUBAD Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE BANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. P. Srivastava, J. These two peti tions have been filed by the parties against the judgment and order dated 19. 11. 1984. The dispute in question is in between the landlord and tenant arising out of a suit filed by Dr. Maqsood Hussain against the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the tenant) for arrears of rent and delivery of possession on the ground of default as well as that the tenant has made material al teration in the rented portion (Chabutra) and the writ petition No. 17349 of 1984 has been filed by the tenant whereas the writ petition No. 3141 of the 1985 has been filed by the landlord. In writ petition No. 17343 of 1984, there is an order of this, Hon'ble Court dated 24. 8. 19850 connect' this writ petition along with writ petition No. 3141 of I985,therefore, the parties were heard in both the petitions and both these writ petitions are being decided by common judgment. This Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 17349 of 1984, Sri Chunubad v. District Judge, Banda and Another shall be the leading case and the judgment is being delivered in this case. A copy of the judg ment shall be placed on record of the Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3141 of 1985.

(2.) THE brief facts, as stated in the writ petition giving rise to the present writ peti tion are that Dr. Maqsood Hussain Khan (landlord) who has been arrayed. a respondent No. 2 in this writ petition filed a suit being S. C. C. No. 18 of 1982 against the petitioner for ejectment, arrears of rent, amounting to Rs. 620 and delivery of possession on the allegations inter alia that the petitioner was a tenant of a disputed accommodation since 1. 2. 1973 on a monthly rent of Rs. 20. He was given tenancy of one Pucca room, front Khaprildar Chabutra. THE tenant raised two walls on the land of Chabutra and built a latrine upon plaintiff s land without the permis sion of the landlord and has taken illegal possession causing disturbance in the user of eastern exit door of the plaintiff's house, therefore, on 22. 5. 1980 a notice was sent to the defendant/tenant directing him not to continue with the construction but when it was not stopped. THE tenant did not pay rent from 1. 5. 1980 despite the service of notice dated 5. 7. 81, which was served on him on 29. 7. 98. THE suit was filed for the ejectment and recovery of the arrears of rent, damages etc.

(3.) DR. Maqsood Hussain Khan has challenged this very judgment in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3141 of 1985, inter alia on the ground that the District Judge has failed to consider the material evidence i. e. rent note and application of the petitioner (tenant) under Section 30 of the Act, in which it was accepted by the tenant that Chabutra is part and parcel of his tenancy. The landlord has also chal lenged the judgment of the revisional authority on the point of accommodation in tenancy on the basis of the report sub mitted by the Amin, notice given by the petitioner and its reply given by the tenant, and on the contention that the Chabutra was not in the tenancy of the tenant. He has also challenged that under Section 180 (d) of the Transfer of Property Act the Chabutra and the construction it shall be deemed to be accession in the property let out and relief of ejectment could not be legally refused. The prayer made by the landlord in this writ petition is that for quashing the order dated 29. 11. 1984 and 21. 9. 1984 passed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively so far as the relief of ejectment from Chabutra and construc tion raised over which by the tenant is concerned, which has been refused by both the Courts below. The counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.