B. N. Sapru, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition arises out of a suit filed on 11-4-1977 by Rang Nath son of Siya Ram Sahu against the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Chief Medical Officer (Civil Surgeon), SSPG Hospital, Varanasi. In the suit, Paras Nath and Badri Nath who were sons of Siya Ram Sahu, were also arrayed as respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner's suit was filed in the Court of Judge Small Causes, Varanasi, and was numbered as SCC Suit No. 363 of 1977. THE petitioner stated that the defendants nos. 1 and 2, namely the State of U. P. and the Chief Medical Officer, Varanasi, were tenants of two premises bearing Corporation No. K/65/85 and part of House No. K/65/86 situate in Mohalla Gola Dina Nath, Varanasi City, on a monthly rent of Rs. 200/- of a joint Hindu family whose head was Siya Ram Sahu. It was the case of the petitioner that during the life time of Siya Ram Sahu a family settlement had taken place and as a result of which the petitioner became the exclusive owner of the houses in suit and became entitled to realise the rent from the government defendants. It was further the case of the petitioner that after the death of Siya Ram Sahu on 3-3-1973, he allowed Smt. Ram Kunwar Devi, the widow of Siya Ram Sahu, to realise the rent. He asserted that the defendants were in arrears of rent from 1-7-1976 but they had not paid the same despite request by the plaintiff for payment of rent. A combined notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was sent by both Rang Nath and Smt. Ram Kunwar Devi. It was asserted that despite the service of the notice the defendants had not vacated the premises in suit, hence the suit for ejectment, arrears of rent and mesne profit was consequently filed. It is necessary to mention here that Smt. Ram Kunwar Devi died before the institution of the suit and hence the suit was filed by Rang Nath alone. The government defendants filed a written statement. They admitted that they were tenants of the houses and that the rent was Rs. 200/- per month. It was stated that the rent was being paid previously to Siya Ram Sahu and after the death of Siya Ram Sahu it was paid to his wife Smt. Ram Kunwar Devi as owner. It was then asserted that when the petitioner damanded the rent from the defendants claiming to be the exclusive owner, he was asked to produce evidence of his being the exclusive owner of the properties in suit which the plaintiff did not produce. The legality of the notice was also challenged. It was also asserted that the suit was not maintainable in view of the provisions of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
(3.) THE brothers of the petitioner, namely Paras Nath and Badri Nath filed written statements stating that they were unnecessarily impleaded as parties. THEy further pleaded that the houses in suit had gone to Rang Nath in the family partition, as pleaded in the plaint. The trial court took the view that since the building was a 'public building' as defined in Section 3 of the Act, the provisions of the Act were not applicable. It found that the Government defendants were in arrears of rent and that a valid notice terminating their tenancy was served. The trial court accordingly decreed the suit on 27-10-1977.;