K. C. Agarwal, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the landlord against the judgment of the Ilnd Additional District Judge, Kanpur, dated 21-5-1984, allowing the revision preferred by the tenant respondents 1 to 10 under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act.
(2.) THE dispute is regarding premises no. 17/3-V, THE Mall Kanpur. THE aforesaid respondents are the tenants thereof. THE tenancy is for residential-cum-non-residential purposes. In 1972, the landlord moved an application under Section 21 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as Act No. XIII of 1972) for release of residential and commercial accommodation. A compromise was arrived at in between the petitioner and the tenants on 10-10-1973. In pursuance of the said compromise, the respondents surrendered land measuring nearly 700 square yards. In the compromise, amongst others, what was agreed was : " (i) they will not make any material alterations in portion in their occupation except with the permission in writing of the landlords. (ii) after the expiry of the said period of 10 years the landlords will be free to develop the site of the tenanted accommodation of the opposite parties facing Mall Road and construct a building thereon. " On 11th October, 1973, a letter was written by the tenants to the landlord seeking to incorporate in the compromise which had been omitted from being mentioned in it. Paragraph 4 of this letter is reproduced below :- " (a) Re-erection of our factory sheds and other requisites of the factory in the land remaining in our tenancy as per plan. (b) Two rooms with or without latrine/bathroom in the back portion of our residential accommodation, not of permanent nature. (c) A siding room adjoining to the main building on the open land between Khaprail shed and the main building. "
(3.) WHAT may be noted here is that the respondents were permitted to construct two rooms in the back portion of the residential accommodation (not of permanent nature). The tenant respondents, however, made default in payment of rent for the period 1-10-1974 to 31-3-1978. The petitioner gave notice in April, 1978 and, thereafter, filed suit no. 804 of 1978 for eviction against the respondents on the ground of default in payment of rent, unauthorised sub-tenancy on a portion and raising of construction without his permission.;