Jagdish Bhalla, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.9.1987, passed by the District Judge, Hardoi, arising out of S.C.C. Revision No. 4 of 1987. The learned District Judge has allowed the revision of the defendant/opposite party No. 2, the judgment of the trial court has been quashed and the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed.
(2.) The premises in dispute was given on rent by Late Sirish Chandra Agarwal to defendant/opposite party No. 2. Sri Sirish Chandra Agarwal died during pendency of this writ petition. Thereafter, he was substituted by his legal heirs 1/1 to 1/9. The tenancy between the parties is not disputed in the light of the agreement acted upon between the parties. Initially, the rent was agreed to be Rs. 40 per month and the opposite party No. 2 had given an advance of Rs. 1.520 to be adjusted at the rate of Rs. 40 per month. After adjustment, it was agreed upon that the rent would be Rs. 50 per month and all the Government taxes would be paid by the tenant and the tenant will neither sub-let the premises nor would be allowed to give it to someone else.
(3.) According to the petitioners, counsel late Sirish Chandra Agarwal, by a notice dated 26th July, 1982 called upon the opposite party No. 2 to clear off the house taxes and water tax amount to rupees 595 and to vacate the aforesaid shop after 30 days of receipt of the notice as the respondent No. 2 has failed to deposit the taxes as agreed by him and has also changed the trade without permission of the landlord and put up a Halwai shop causing damage to the building and from the smoke caused In the trade had provided menace to other tenants. The said notice was replied on behalf of opposite party No. 2 by Sri D. S. Sinha, Advocate on 4/5.8.1982, inter alia, informing that all the Government taxes have been paid by the opposite party No. 2 and no damage is being caused to the shop and none of the tenants of Sirish Chandra Agarwal has been harassed. Late Sirish Chandra Agarwal filed a Suit No. 31 of 1982 for arrears of rent and ejectment in the Court of Judge. Small Causes. Hardoi, inter alia, the specific grounds that the petitioner has contravened the conditions of the agreement by not paying the taxes, by changing the user and has taken his two brothers Bhagwati Prasad and Lalta Prasad as his partners in the new business. It was also relied upon that the two brothers are not the family members of the opposite party No. 2 and, as such, it amounts to sub-letting under the provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972 In these circumstances, late Sitish Chandra Agarwal prayed for ejectment of opposite party No. 2. After due opportunity to the parties, the Munsif East decreed the suit by judgment dated 7.3.1987. The grounds which were agitated by the plaintiff before the trial court were that the defendant/opposite party No. 2 has filled to pay Government taxes and has changed the user of the shop which was given only for "PAN BIRI' to the sweetmeat shop and was causing damage to the property and creating menace for other tenants. Besides the above two grounds, it has also been agitated before the trial court that since the opposite party has taken his two brothers Lal Prasad who is younger to the opposite party No. 2 and Bhagwati Prasad who is elder to him and since they are not his family members, in the process, the opposite party No. 2 has contravened and violated the conditions of the agreement and provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972. In these circumstances, it was prayed that the opposite party No. 2 be evicted and the suit be decreed for the arrears of rent as well. All these grounds have been reiterated by the learned counsel for the petitioners and also submitted that now the defendant/opposite party No. 2 has again changed the business In the name and style Tulsi Watch and Electronics House' and this fact has been brought before this Court by way of an amendment to which no reply has been filed by the respondents.;