- (1.) Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Tenant petitioner is challenging the validity and correctness of the judgment and order dated 31.8.2010 passed by District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in SCC revision No. 47/2010, Shiv Shanker Awasthi v. Guru Narayan Lal Nigam as well as judgment and decree dated 26.5.2010 passed by Judge, Small Causes Court, Kanpur Nagar in SCC suit No. 515 of 1985, appended as Annexure No. 13 and 11 respectively to the writ petition. The landlord respondent filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent on the ground that the petitioner was tenant of one room and Courtyard on the ground floor of House No. 119/10, Darshan Purwa, Bamba Road, Kanpur at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month; that tenant petitioner illegally occupied Courtyard measuring 10 x 6 feet and raised constructions thereon upto the height of about 14 feet; that tenant petitioner was required to leave the unauthorised construction but instead of doing so, he agreed to enhance the rent from Rs. 50/- to Rs. 90/- per month; that tenant petitioner did not pay enhanced rent thereafter and failed to pay rent w.e.f. July 1981 and rent w.e.f. 3.12.1983; hence a notice of demand and determination of the tenancy was personally served upon him but he neither paid the arrears of rent nor vacated the disputed accommodation.
(2.) The petitioner tenant contested the case by filing his written statement denying the plaint allegations. He further pleaded that he had not agreed to enhance rent from Rs. 50/- to Rs. 90/-; that plaintiff respondent refused to accept the rent and as such he deposited rent under section 30(1) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the Court of Munsif City; that he has also made requisite deposit under section 20(4) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 on the first date of hearing. It was further submitted that he did not make any addition or alteration in the accommodation in question; that he had paid Rs. 1,855/- in advance for repairs of the building at the time of letting and the plaintiff accordingly carried on requisite repairs in the building which amount was adjusted in the amount of rent.
(3.) On the basis of pleadings and evidence led by the parties, the Judge, Small Causes Court, decreed the suit in toto vide judgment and decree dated 26.5.2010, against which SCC revision No. 47 of 2010 was filed by the petitioner tenant.;