GORACHAND PATTANAIK Vs. SURENDRANATH PATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant, by filing this Appeal under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'the Code'), has assailed the judgment and decree dtd. 16/8/2017 and 29/8/2017 respectively passed by the learned 1st Additional District Judge, Khurda in R.F.A. No.23 of 2016.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, in order to avoid confusion and bring in clarity, the parties hereinafter have been referred to, as they have been arraigned in the Trial Court.

(3.) The Plaintiff's case is that he is the owner of the suit land over which the shop room stands and the Defendant had been inducted therein as a monthly tenant and was running a furniture store being its proprietor. It is stated that the tenancy being renewed with effect from 1/1/2012, the monthly rent was fixed at Rs.1100.00, payable on the last day of each English calendar month and the period was to end on 30/11/2012. An agreement had come into being on 1/1/2012. It is stated that the Defendant paid a sum of Rs.3000.00 as the security money and after expiry of the period of tenancy, the Defendant continued to occupy the suit shop room and premises by paying the rent to the Plaintiff as per the terms of the agreement. It is stated that the rent was paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff till the month of April, 2013. The Defendant then, as promised, did not vacate the suit shop and premises and rather stopped paying the rent from May, 2013 onwards. So, the Plaintiff terminated the tenancy by issuing notice in consonance with the provision under Sec. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act (for short, 'the T.P. Act') to the Defendant demanding him to vacate the suit shop and premises. The notice was sent by registered post with AD on 22/7/2013 and thereby the Plaintiff demanded vacant possession of the suit shop and premises on expiry of the period allowed therein and pay the rent. It is stated that the Defendant, having acknowledged the receipt, sent a reply on 22/8/2013 in accepting his position/status as tenant till April, 2013. It is stated therein that he is possessing the suit land from 1/5/2013 pursuant to an agreement for sale executed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant whereunder the Defendant had paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000.00 as advance consideration out of the agreed consideration of Rs.2,50,000.00 for the purpose of sale of the suit shop and premises. It is stated that for that reason, the Defendant is not liable to vacate the suit shop and premises and pay the rent any more.