Ajoy Nath Ray, C.J. and Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) -This is an appeal from an order of an Hon'ble single Judge dated the 14.2.2006.
(2.) IT is an order passed in a writ matter. The writ petition was filed by the tenant Bahuguna, who prayed therein for complete stoppage of all proceedings before the Judge Small Causes Court and the Rent Controller in regard to the appellant's eviction in suit No. 6 of 1992 and two other cases related thereto being Nos. 94 of 1991 and 29 of 1992. The brief facts are that the deceased father of the tenant one Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna was a tenant in the premises in question originally and the tenancy had commenced 60-70 years ago. The original tenant died on 16.3.1989 and his widow and the writ petitioner, being one of his surviving sons, continued to live in the tenanted premises. On the basis of the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, the writ petitioner made an application before the Rent Controller for being declared as the heir ordinarily residing with the deceased tenant at the time of his death. A favourable order was obtained by him. If that order becomes confirmed, Bahuguna would be as unevictable as the original tenant himself.
(3.) THE proceedings in regard to which the writ petition was filed related to the landlord's claim for re-entry on the basis of bona fide requirement for own use and occupation. Eviction was also claimed on the ground of default in payment of rent. The Hon'ble single Judge has opined that if Bahuguna was residing with the deceased tenant, then on the basis of the Act of 1972 he became entitled to protection and no separate declaration was necessary. His Lordship has, however, further held that as the landlord's proceedings were got stayed in the writ on the basis of an interim order passed on 23.10.1992, and the matter had not progressed at all for 14 years, the writ petitioner was guilty of an abuse of the process of the Court. His Lordship also opined that the premises consist of 8 rooms and two verandahs in a good locality in Allahabad and the rent of Rs. 150 per month is no rent. Relying on the Supreme Court case of M. V. Acharya v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1998 SC 602, His Lordship has exercised jurisdiction to enhance the rent in the writ involving a landlord and tenant, and His Lordship has raised the rent to Rs. 2,000 per month. It is further ordered that the rate of rent upto February, 2006, will be determined by the Rent Controller. Apart from this, His Lordship's order has disposed of the proceedings in Case No. 94 of 1991.;