GIRIN PATHAK Vs. GHANSHYAM DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Present revision petition involves a Landlord tenant dispute wherein the Landlord sought for eviction of the tenant on the ground of default under Section 5(4) of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972 (hereinafter 'the 1972 Act').

(2.) The plaintiff/respondent is the owner of the suit premises measuring 24ft x 8ft of the R.C.C. building having CMC holding No. 1442 situated on a plot of land measuring 1 katha 8 lechas covered by Dag No. 539 of K.P. Patta No. (old) 13 (New) 58 village Hatigaon, Basistha Road, Mouza-Beltola, <FRM>JUDGEMENT_562_GAULT4_2005Html1.htm</FRM> The Land lord leased out the premises in question to the petitioner in this revision petition by an oral agreement on a monthly rent ofRs. 350/- (Rupees three hundred fifty) only from the month of September, 1989. In the said oral agreement the defendant/ petitioner assured the landlord that he would open a grocery shop in the tenanted premises. The rent on the leased out premises was subsequently raised to Rs. 450/- (Rupees four hundred fifty) only since January, 1993 and thereafter enhanced to Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred) only since January, 1994 till date and the rent to be paid within the 1 st week of each following month. The said oral agreement for opening a grocery shop though agreed upon, the defendant-petitioner opened a restaurant in the name and style as 'Manju Restaurant' to which the owner had objected to but the defendant/petitioner subsequently, had constructed a temporary C.I. Sheet shed in front of the stair case by blocking the: entrance of the back side of the rented room and the said shed was used as a cook shed of the said restaurant. The main ground for eviction was that the defendant/petitioner was very irregular in payment of house rent and a total sum of Rs. 1875/- was still outstanding for the priod from January, 1993 to November 1995 and Rs. 3000/- (Rupees three thousand only) being the house rent for the subsequent period of December, 1995 to May, 1996 and the plaintiff thus sought for a decree for eviction being a defaulter along with arrear rents by way of filing title Suit No. 376 of 1996 before the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) No. 1 at Guwahati.

(3.) Upon receipt of the summon the defendant/petitioner contested the suit by filing the written statement denying the averments made in the plaint contending inter alia therein that he is not a defaulter and has been paying the house rent to the landlord regularly and as such he has not violated any terms of the agreement as alleged. His specific case is that the landlord has now started a restaurant business in the said premises which will hamper his business if the petitioner's business of restaurant is allowed to continue and hence prayed for dismissal of the suit.