PRAKASH JARYAL Vs. H.P. WAKF BOARD SHIMLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 1/petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dtd. 31/5/2012, passed by learned Wakf Tribunal (District Judge) Kangra at Dharamshala in Civil Suit No. 03-D/I/2009 which held the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 legally entitled for recovery of rent for three years, prior to institution of the suit i.e. 17/1/2009 to the tune of Rs.7200.00 @ 200/ per month alongwith interest @ 9% per annum. It further held the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 to be entitled to recovery of illegal usage and occupation charges w.e.f. 17/1/2009 till delivery of possession @ Rs.200.00 alongwith interest @ 9% per annum.

(2.) The parties shall be referred to as the plaintiff and defendants. The plaintiff filed a suit for possession on account of demolition of a temporary construction (khokha) existing over land comprised in khata No. 451,khatauni No. 679, khasra No. 951 min area measuring 10-2 sq. meters as per jamabandi for the year 2003-04, situated at Gabli Dhar, Mauza Khaniara, Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra. An additional relief for recovery of Rs.55,600.00 was also sought against defendant No. 1 on account of arrears of rent w.e.f. 1/10/1996 to 31/3/1996 amounting to Rs.22600.00 @ 200 per month.

(3.) It is averred that plaintiff is owner in possession of the suit property, over which it inducted defendant No. 1 as tenant, vide allotment order dtd. 22/2/2011 (Ext. P-4). It was averred that rent of arrears was fixed @200/- but defendant No. 1 was regular defaulter in payment of rent. Not only this, defendant No. 1 violated the terms and conditions of the tenancy by raising a temporary construction (Khokha) on the rented land, that too without the approval and consent of the plaintiff. It was further pleaded that defendant No. 1 had sublet the land and temporary construction to defendant No. 2 without any authority and had also delivered the possession to him without any right and without consent of the plaintiff. Lastly, it was averred that the plaintiff required the suit land/property for its personal use and occupation and therefore it terminated the tenancy of defendant No. 1 w.e.f. 31/1/2006. Notice to this effect had been sent upon defendant No. 1 under Sec. 106 of Transfer of Property Act dtd. 7/3/2006. Defendants were requested to hand over the vacant possession of the suit land/property on or before 1/4/2006, but they failed to do so,hence the suit.