UTTAR PRADESH JAL NIGAM THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND ANOTHER Vs. WAJID SONS EXPORTS LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (FROM: NAINITAL)
Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam Through Its Managing Director And Another
Wajid Sons Exports Ltd. Through Its Director
Click here to view full judgement.
Rajesh Tandon, J. -
(1.)HEARD Shri Alok Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri D.S. Patni, Counsel for the revisionists and Shri T.A. Khan, Counsel for the opposite party. By the present revision filed under section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, the revisionists have prayed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 1.12.1998 passed by the Special Judge/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nainital by which the suit of the plaintiff has been decreed directing the defendants for eviction as well as for payment of arrears of rent from 1.6.1991 to 19.8.1994 amounting to Rs. 9567/ - and from the date 2.6.1996 upto the recovery of possession after the enhancement of 25%, amounting to Rs. 11,958.75.
(2.)BRIEFLY stated, a suit was filed by the plaintiff -respondent praying for the eviction of the defendants and for recovery of Rs. 4,06,008/ - on account of arrears of rent, taxes, mesne profits and interest till the date of instituting the suit as well as the interest @ 18% per annum. According to the plaint averments, the plaintiff -respondent is the owner and landlord of the premises of which the defendants are the tenant of Suite Nos. 6, 15, 16, 21 and 23 with gallery in hotel Wajid Waldrof, Main Road, Mallital, Nainital. Proceedings for enhancement of rent against the defendant under section 21 sub -class 8 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was initiated by the plaintiff -respondent.
Prescribed authority has allowed the application and enhanced the rent to the extent of Rs. 6961.30. The plaintiff has preferred the appeal being Appeal No. 8 of 1992. The applicant has also preferred an appeal against the order of the prescribed authority being Appeal No. 9 of 1992. The Additional District Judge by its order dated 3.6.1993 passed in Rent Control Appeal Nos. 8 of 1992 and 9 of 1992 enhanced the rent to the extent of Rs. 9567/ - per month with effect from 1.6.1991 exclusive of all taxes.
(3.)THE plaintiff by way of notice on 19.7.1994 under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act terminated the tenancy of the defendants after the expiry of 30 days of service of the notice upon them. The tenancy was terminated on 19.8.1994. But inspite of the same, the defendants neither delivered the possession of the premises nor paid the enhanced rent and remained in unauthorised occupation since 20.8.1994. The plaintiff, therefore, has claimed to the following effect; -
(a) That a decree for Rs. 4,08,008.00 on account of arrears of rent, taxes, mesne profits and interest till the date of suit be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
(b) That interest @ 18% per annum pendente lite and future on the amount of arrears of rent, taxes, mesne profits and interest accruing till the date of suit be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.