Manoj Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) Heard Sri P.C. Jain, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Ashok Kumar Rai, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.
(2.) The instant revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against an order dated 11.4.2007 whereby the Court of Small Causes in course of deciding SCC Suit No.2 of 2006 has directed for return of the plaint for presentation before regular civil court in exercise of power under Section 23 of the Act.
(3.) The suit in question was instituted by the revisionist (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') for recovery of arrears of rent and for eviction. The material allegations, in the plaint, are that the plaintiff is owner and landlord of a property consisting of one room, one hall and open land in village Dura, Tehsil Kiraoli, Police Station Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra. It was let out by his father Shriram to the respondents (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendants') in the month of February 1980 on the basis of an oral contract of tenancy for opening a police chowki. At the time of letting out, the defendants promised to pay rent as fixed by the Government. The defendants kept assuring the plaintiff's father that as soon as the rent is fixed by the State Government, he would be paid the rent but they failed to keep their promise. After death of plaintiff's father, the plaintiff wrote a letter on 14.2.1994 to defendant no.2 making request to pay the rent. Defendant no.2 forwarded the aforesaid letter for enquiry to defendant no.3 on 21.4.1994. On 12.5.1994, defendant no.2 wrote to Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supplies), Agra to get the rent of the premises determined by the Executive Engineer, PWD. The correspondence between the defendants and the plaintiff continued for some time and ultimately the Executive Engineer, PWD vide letter dated 24.4.2001 informed defendant No.2 that rent of the premises, as per norms, would come to Rs.1320/- per month. The defendants still did not pay any rent compelling the plaintiff to serve notice under Section 80 CPC read with Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 claiming arrears of rent and calling upon the defendants to vacate the premises. The defendants still failed to pay the rent nor vacated the premises. Consequently the suit was instituted.;