SHARAD Vs. VISHNU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point involved in this revision is as to whether the tenancy of the petitioner (original defendant) has been properly terminated.

(2.) The plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 2461/1975 in the Small Causes Court, Nagpur, to recover possession of a house property with an allegation that by a notice dated May 20, 1975, the defendant's tenancy has been terminated by the end of the tenancy month of June 1975. The learned Small Causes Court, after recording the evidence that was led before it, came to the conclusion that the tenancy has been terminated. Consequently, a decree for possession has been passed and the defendant has come in revision.

(3.) The contention of the defendant is that his tenancy has not at all been terminated and, as such, the plaintiff cannot claim possession of the rented premises. At the stage of this revision petition, there cannot be any controversy that the plaintiff sent a notice dated 20-5-1975 to the defendant by registered post. Ex. 17 is a copy of the notice and Ex. 18 is a receipt which the plaintiff obtained when he registered that notice. However, the acknowledgement signed by the defendant has not been produced. The defendant has, in his written statement, denied of having received any such notice. The plaintiff in his testimony has stated that he had received an acknowledgement from the post office but it was lost. He has also stated that the said acknowledgement was signed by the wife of the defendant. It appears that the wife of the defendant had gone on extensive tour of Southern India. The tour was conducted by Prasad Travels and it went on from May 16 to June 1, 1975. The defendant has led evidence in that respect. He has also examined his wife, and the learned Small Causes Court has come to the conclusion that the wife of the defendant was not at Nagpur between May 16 to June 1, 1975, Similarly, he has accepted the evidence of the defendant's wife that she had not received the notice and had not signed the acknowledgement.