Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Dinesh Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Manoj Goswami, learned Standing counsel for the respondents.
(2.) Petitioner's suit for eviction of the respondents from the tenanted portion has been dismissed by the courts below. The main ground on which the suit has been dismissed is that the rent of the 5 rooms situate on the first floor of the building which are under tenancy of the respondents is Rs. 120/- and therefore the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are applicable to it. It means that the petitioner can bring a suit for eviction of the tenant only on the grounds as specified in Section 20 of the Act and not by simply terminating the tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
(3.) The argument advanced from the side of the petitioner in the courts below was that in the building there are 15 other tenants and the rent realised from all the tenants together is more than Rs. 2,000/- per month. Therefore, in view of Section 2 (g) of the Act, it is exempt from the applicability of the Act.;