- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard Sri Komal Mehrotra for the petitioner and Sri P. K. Jain for the respondent.
(2.) THIS petition arises out of the judgment and order dated 24. 11. 2006, passed by the Additional District Judge XVI, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur in S. C. C. Revision No. 1991 of 2005 and the judgment and order dated 29. 7. 2005, passed by the Judge, Small Cause Court, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur in S. C. C. Case No. 35 of 2004. By the judgment and order dated 29. 7. 2005 the Judge, Small Cause Court, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur has decreed the suit against the defendant-petitioner-tenant to handover vacant possession of the premises in dispute to the plaintiff-respondent-landlord within 30 days holding the plaintiff to be entitled to receive Rs. 3,271 as arrears of rent and Rs. 588. 77 as taxes apart from Rs. 100 as costs. By order dated 24. 11. 2006 the revisional court has partly allowed the revision filed by the petitioner by rejecting the revision in respect of his ejectment and modifying the judgment and decree of the trial court in respect of arrears of rent but maintaining the finding of default on the ground of arrears of rent.
(3.) THE respondent is the owner and landlord of the premises in dispute by virtue of registered sale deed executed by the erstwhile owner Sri Santosh Kumar in his favour on 4. 1. 2001. He filed S. C. C. Suit No. 35 of 2004 alleging that the defendant-petitioner was a tenant in the ground floor of House No. 128/38-F, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur on a monthly rent of Rs. 100 besides taxes that he committed default in payment of rent and was in arrears of rent since 4. 5. 2001 to 3. 12. 2003 besides arrears of water tax and sever tax amounting to Rs. 558 and that he had put the premises under his tenancy to inconsistent user in as much he was given the shops in dispute for doing business of general merchant but it was being used for grinding spices and Dais by installing grinding machinery in the shop. The suit was contested by the petitioner by filing written statement denying the allegations of default as well as of inconsistent user, inter alia, that he was a tenant since 1974 and had installed the grinding machines with permission of the erstwhile landlord. It was also challenged by him that he had taken the premises in dispute from the erstwhile landlord on a monthly rent of Rs. 100. 30 including taxes @ Rs. 15. 30p. per month which he has paid upto April, 2001.;