RAM NARAIN Vs. RAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs-appellant filed suit for possession after terminating the tenancy of the defendants in terms of the provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of property Act. The said suit was decreed by the learned trial Court but in appeal the judgment and decree of the trial Court was reversed on the ground that the area where the shop in dispute is situated is now within the Municipal limits of Kharkhoda and the provisions of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 apply to the shop in dispute and, thus, the civil Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit. It is the said judgment and decree which is subject matter of challenge in the present appeal.

(2.) THE defendants were inducted as tenants of the shop described in the plaint at a monthly rent of Rs. 60/-. The plaintiffs terminated the tenancy of the defendants when they failed to pay the rent for different periods.

(3.) THE learned trial Court after relying upon the statement of PW1 Ram Narain found that notice dated 26.7.1976 Exhibit P-3 was served upon the defendants vide acknowledgement receipt Exhibit P-5 and, thus, passed a decree of possession in favour of the plaintiffs.