S.U.KHAN, J. - (1.) THIS is landlord's writ petition. Petitioners landlords filed SCC Suit No. 255 of 1984 against respondents No. 2 to 5 Smt. Ram Kali and others before JSCC Meerut. In the plaint of the suit, it was alleged that plaintiffs were landlords and defendants were their tenants in the premises in dispute which was in the form of one room. Rate of rent was Rs. 2 per month. It was alleged in the plaint that the room in dispute was let out for residential purpose to Badlu Singh the original tenant and that after his death defendants became tenants who thereafter shifted their residence to their own house and sub-let the room in dispute to Deep Chand and Tulsi who were using the same for tying and keeping cows and buffaloes for dairy purpose which they were running. It was also alleged that due to this act of tying cattles the accommodation in dispute had been damaged. In this manner eviction was sought on the ground of damage to the building, sub-letting and inconsistent user as provided under Section 20(2)(b), (d) and (e) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972.
(2.) THE trial Court found that even though Deep Chand and Tulsi were sons of Badlu Singh the original tenant however as they were not residing along with their father at the time of his death hence they did not inherit the tenancy. The trial Court, therefore, found that the suit was not bad for want of notice of termination of tenancy to Deep Chand and Tulsi. The trial Court further held that even though they did not inherit the tenancy however it could not be said that Deep Chand and Tulsi were sub-tenants. However the trial Court decreed the suit on the ground of damage to the building and inconsistent user. The trial Court decreed the suit for eviction through judgment and decree dated 10-1-1986. Admittedly at the time of filing of the suit rent for less than one month was due (i.e. 36 Naya Paisa). Trial Court/JSCC Meerut through judgment and decree dated 10-1-1986 decreed the suit for recovery of the said amount along with mesne profit and future damages at the rate of Rs. 2 per month. Against judgment and decree passed by the trial Court contesting respondents filed SCC Revision No. 58 of 1986. The revision was allowed on 18-12-1986 by IInd Additional District Judge, Meerut. The revisional Court set-aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court and dismissed the suit. This writ petition by the landlord is directed against the said revisional Court's order.
(3.) AS far as the issue of damage to the building is concerned, in my opinion revisional Court rightly reversed the finding of the trial Court on this issue. It was alleged by the plaintiff and accepted by the trial Court that due to use of the premises in dispute for keeping cows and buffaloes and due to their cow dung building got damaged. Even if the allegation of the landlord is taken to be correct still it will not be covered by Section 20(2)(b) of the Act. According to the said provision, damage must be caused to the building by the tenant directly. The damage if any to the building due to its use is not covered by the said provision. The said provision uses the words wilfully caused or permitted to be caused substantial damage to the building. Even otherwise no specific damage to the building was averred or proved. The allegation as well as evidence adduced on behalf of plaintiff was of very general nature.;