L. BHAGWAN DAS MENGI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff instituted a suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,000/- as damages for wrongful use and occupation of the suit premises with proportionate costs against the defendants. The plaintiff alleged that 10 years lease in favour of the defendants, of 'Bhagwan Niwas' situate in Jammu expired on the 11th of January, 1959. The defendants were required to hand over vacant possession of the premises together with furniture and fittings on that date which the defendants failed to do. It was alleged that a notice under Sec. 80 of the Civil Procedure Code was delivered to them on 25th and 26th August 1958, informing the defendants that the plaintiff will charge Rs. 500/- P.M. as damages for wrongful use and occupation of the premises. The defendants failed to vacate the premises on the date mentioned in the notice and hence this suit for recovery of Rs. 1,000/- as damages for wrongful use and occupation of the premises at the rate of Rs. 500/- P.M. for a period of two months.

(2.) THE defendants resisted the suit on the grounds, that the suit was not maintainable in view of arbitration clause in the lease agreement and in view of Sec. 28 of the Contract Act, that the Jammu and Kashmir Houses and Shops Rent Control Act of 2009 was applicable to the house in question and the plaintiff landlord was not entitled to demand or receive any enhanced rent for the same and that no valid notice of ejectment was given to the defendants determining the lease. It was further pleaded that the lease not having been terminated the plaintiff was not entitled to damages for wrongful use and occupation of the building. Lastly, it was averred that damages at the rate of Rs. 500/-P.M. were penal and excessive. Defendant No. 2 pleaded that he was improperly made a party to the suit and that his name was liable to be struck off. The trial Court raised various issues, the important ones among them are as follows :­

(3.) IT is common ground between the parties that the defendant took the premises on lease for a further term of 5 years on the same rent and conditions as mentioned in the previous agreement. The second term of 5 years expired on 12th January, 1959. The plaintiff served a notice on the defendant calling upon him to vacate the premises on the 12th of January 1959, failing which he would charge Rs. 500/- P.M. as damages for wrongful use and occupation of the premises. The lease as mentioned above was for a period of 10 years commencing from 12th January, 1949. Under Sec. 11(a) of the Transfer of Property Act the lease had terminated by efflux of time. Although no notice to quit in this case was necessary yet the plaintiff served a notice on the defendants on 25th and 26th August 1958 requesting them to vacate the premises on the expiry of the tenancy, i.e. the 12th of January, 1959.