- (1.) Heard Sri Faheem Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.V.S. Raghuvansi for the respondent. Dispute relates to shop No. 1 situated at Mohalla Afganan, Dhampur Road, Qasba and Pargana Nahtaur, district Bijnor, which was let out to the petitioner-tenant in May, 1995 on a monthly rent of Rs. 500/ - per month excluding tax and electricity dues, vide notice dated 2.8.2005 respondent-landlord terminated the tenancy by giving one month notice. Arrear of outstanding rent of nine months was also claimed. When the tenant-petitioner failed to pay the rent and vacate the premises, suit No. 48 of 2005 was filed before the Judge, Small Causes Court seeking a decree of eviction and arrears of rent. Suit was filed on the allegation that sanction for construction was accorded by Nagar Palika Parishad, Nahtaur on 20.5.1994 and the construction was completed in February, 1995 and it was let out in 1995 on a monthly rent of Rs. 500/-. It was also pleaded that tenancy was from month to month beginning from first of every month and the tenant was in arrears of rent since 1.11.2004. The suit was contested by the tenant-petitioner by filing written statement denying the plaint allegation. It was pleaded in the written statement that shop in dispute was constructed in the year 1980 and thus was within the purview of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 and the alleged sanction by the Nagar Palika Parishad in 1994 is forged and fabricated and has been obtained in collusion with the employees of the Nagar Palika Parishad. It was further pleaded that despite tender of rent on various occasions, the same was refused by the respondent-landlord and money order sent was also refused.
(2.) Respondent-Landlord apart from oral evidence filed the application for permission of construction, copy of the house tax receipts, receipts for payment of electricity charges, copy of the notice terminating the tenancy and first assessment for 1995-2000 as documentary evidence. Tenant-petitioner apart from examining himself filed the money order receipt, challan form of depositing the amount as documentary evidence.
(3.) Trial Court after considering the evidence of the parties held that petitioner was a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 500/ - and the provisions of Act No. XIII of 1972 were not applicable as the shop was constructed in 1995. It was further held that since the provision of the Act are not attracted the tenant-petitioner is not entitled to benefit of Section 20(4) of the Act and the tenancy has been terminated by a valid notice. On the basis of the said finding the suit was decreed. Aggrieved by the order, tenant-petitioner went up in revision which was dismissed and the findings of the trial Court was affirmed.;