- (1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. This revision under Section 25 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 18-7-2002, passed by Addl. District Judge/judge Small Causes Court, Moradabad, in S. C. C. Suit No. 3 of 1999, decreeing the suit of the opposite party for ejectment of applicant, arrears of rent and damages.
(2.) OPPOSITE party filed a suit against the applicant for his ejectment, arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 32,400 and damages at the rate of Rs. 30 per day with the allegations that he was owner/landlord of the premises in suit and opposite party was its tenant on monthly rental of Rs. 900/ -. The tenanted premises consisted of three room, kitchen, latrine and bath rooms, fully detailed in Schedule Kha of the plaint. The original tenancy was between Smt. Prabha Rani Tandon, the mother of the opposite party and the applicant. Smt. Prabha Rani Tandon died on 4-7-95 and thereafter the opposite party became owner/landlord. The premises in question was constructed in the year 1988 and, therefore, the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 were not applicable to it. After death of the mother of the opposite party the applicant failed to pay rent from July, 1995. He also sub-let one room of the premises in question to one Sunil Kumar Sharma and was realising rent from him. The opposite party served a composite notice of demand and ejectment on the applicant on 17-7-1998 through registered post demanding rent within a period of thirty days and terminating his tenancy after one month. The above notice was served on the applicant on 20-7-1998. The applicant gave a wrong reply to the said notice on 12-8-98. Subsequently, Sunil Kumar handed over possession of the room in his occupation to opposite party on 31-8-98. The applicant neither paid rent nor vacated the premises in question; hence the suit. The defendant applicant filed written statement admitting the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, but contested the suit on the grounds inter-alia that the rate of rent was only Rs. 200/- per month. The premises in question was constructed in the year 1982 and, therefore, the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 were applicable to it. He further contended that he paid rent of the premises in question up to 30th April, 1998. But after receipt of notice he again remitted the rent demanded by the opposite party at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month through money order, which the opposite party refused to accept. He had not sub-let any room to any Sunil Kumar. The accommodation in his tenancy consisted of two rooms, kitchen, latrine and bath room and the alleged room in the occupation of Suresh Chandra was not part of his tenanted portion. The learned Judge Small Causes Court framed necessary issues and after considering evidence of the parties held that the premises in question was constructed in the year 1988 and the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 were not applicable to it. The rate of rent was Rs. 900/- per month. The defendant/applicant was in arrears of rent from 1-7-1995 and had sub-let a room of his tenanted portion to one Sunil Kumar. He further held that the receipt of notice was admitted and the notice was valid. With these findings the learned JSCC decreed the suit for ejectment of applicant from the premises in question and for recovery of arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 32,400/- along with the interest at the rate of 9% per annum and damages at the rate of Rs. 30/- per day.
(3.) AGGRIEVED with the above judgment and decree of the trial Court the applicant has come up in this revision. Heard Sri Prakash Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri K. J. Arora, learned counsel for the opposite party and perused the record.;