- (1.) R. K. Mahajan, J. This order will also dispose of Civil Revision No. 38 of 1983 as the facts involved are same.
(2.) THIS revision is against the order of Shri K. C. Lamba, Judge, S. C. C. (1st Additional District Judge), Nainital dated 27-8-1983 by virtue of which he held that the shop was not constructed within 10 years of the suit and as such the provisions of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act No. XIII of 1972) are not applicable. He further observed that the revisionist-plaintiff did not come to the court with clean hands and she is not entitled for the rent though the learned trial Judge held that the relation ship of landlord and tenant exist between the parties. He also held that there is no valid proof of payment of arrears of rent from 1-10-1981 to 31-10- 1983, amounting to Rs. 7,200. There is no dispute regarding taking of the shop on tenancy by the tenant-defendant-opposite party and termination of the tenancy from 18-8-1982. The rate of rent is Rs. 300 per month. It was alleged that the shot) was completed in the year 1979 and there are arrears of rent from 1-10-81 to 30-6-82 and Rs. 301 rupees were claimed expenses of notice. Feeling aggrieved, the revision has been filed by the landlady challenging the finding of the court that they are perverse and unreasonable. The order was also attacked that once the court has given a finding that there are arrears of rent etc. The decree for eviction should have been followed automatically as the rent was not paid on first hearing. She has also challenged the finding regarding the applicability or the Act No. XIII of 1972 to the newly constructed building.
(3.) THE tenant has also filed a revision regarding the finding of the lower court on the relationship of landlord and tenant. I have heard the counsel for the parties and I find force in the revision filed by the landlady (revisionist) on the following reasonings.;