AMRITLAL Vs. MUTA VALLI HUSSAIN TEKRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Arguments heard on merits finally. Judgment dictated in Open Court.

(2.) Short facts of the case are that respondent/Waqf filed a suit for eviction against the appellant alleging that the appellant is tenant in the suit accommodation @ Rs. 80/- per month vide rent-note dated 1-4-2002. It was alleged that appellant has encroached the vacant land after demolition of the western wall. It was alleged that report was lodged in that regard on 7-8-2001. Further case of the respondent was that the notice was issued on 11-10-2001 whereby tenancy was terminated under section 106 of Transfer of Property Act and the notice was duly served on appellant on 12-1-2002, thereafter, an application was submitted by the appellant wherein it was prayed that appellant be excused. It was alleged that the appellant also submitted an affidavit on 11-12-2001 wherein it was admitted that he has encroached on the shop of Dilip Kumar and it was agreed that in future appellant will comply with the terms of rent agreement. It was alleged that again on 19-1-2002 and 22-3-2002 applications were filed by the appellant with a request to return the articles which were seized from the shop of Dilip Kumar, which was returned. It was alleged that new rent-note was executed by the appellant on 1-4-2002 but on 11-8-2002 again the employees of Waqf informed that appellant has demolished the wall towards western side and has encroached the shop of Dilip Kumar. It was alleged that notice issued was neither replied nor the rent was paid from 1-7-2002. It was prayed that decree of eviction be passed.

(3.) The suit was contested by the appellant by filing the written statement wherein all the plaint allegations were denied. It was denied that any encroachment was made by die appellant. It was denied that the wall of western side was demolished. It was alleged that notice whereby tenancy was terminated, was not valid. It was alleged that the person who has filed the suit on behalf of respondent is not competent to file the suit. It was prayed that suit be dismissed. After framing of issues and recording of evidence learned trial Court decreed the suit filed by the respondent against which an appeal was filed which was also dismissed, hence this appeal.