SHISHIR KUMAR,J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.11.2009 (Annexure 5 to writ petition). Respondent who is landlord filed a suit against petitioner for ejectment and arrears of rent from 1.2.2002 to 2.2.2003 amounting to Rs.1,840/- including water tax. It was averred that aforesaid shop has been let out on a monthly rent of Rs.600/- per month including water tax, house tax and sewer tax. Petitioner was not paying rent, therefore, a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was given for ejectment on the ground that shop in question was constructed in the year 1996 and it was first time assessed in the year 1998 by the Nagar Palika, therefore, Act No.13 of 1972 is not applicable. The Judge, Small Causes Court after considering the case of parties has recorded a finding that Act No.13 of 1972 is not applicable which is apparent from the assessment of 1998 and suit was decreed to that extent and petitioner was directed to vacate the said shop within 30 days from the date of order. Petitioner aggrieved by aforesaid order filed a revision. Revisional court too has recorded a finding that shop in question has been assessed first time by Nagar Palika in the year 1997-98, therefore, Act No.13 of 1972 is not applicable and mere a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act is sufficient for getting possession of shop in question. Petitioner aggrieved by aforesaid order has approached this Court.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner submits that various documents have been filed showing therein that shop was constructed and his father was tenant from 1975. Various documents like death certificate of Bagirath, registration certificate dated 31.4.1981, assessment of steel works from 1993 to 1996, receipts issued from Labour Department and various orders issued by the Sales Tax Officer dated 29.9.1991, 27.3.1982, 19.9.1983, 29.9.1981 and judicial order dated 22.4.2002 but these documents which are apparent from the judgment that these shops were assessed in the year 1982-83, 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1991-1992 and the copies to that effect was also submitted but these documents have not been considered and no discussions have been made and on the basis of assessment of 1998 produced by the landlord-respondent, the courts below has held that shop in question is a new one and Act No.13 of 1972 will not be applicable in view of fact that it was first time assessed in the year 1998. Revisional court has also not considered the issue and dismissed the revision.;