PRATIBHA VERMA Vs. XIIITH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LUCKNOW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.A. Khan, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P.K. Khare, learned counsel for contesting respondents.

(2.) This is tenant's writ petition arising out of S.C.C. Suit No.250 of 1995, Kamakhyadham Charitiable Trust Baba Bhoot Nath Ashram Vs. Smt. Pratibha Verma. Property in dispute is a shop, rent of which is Rs.480/- per month. It was also pleaded in the plaint that U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 was not applicable to the building in dispute for two reasons. Firstly, first assessment was made in September, 1990, hence that would be deemed to be date of construction and Rent Control Act would be applicable since 2030. Secondly, property belonged to public religious institution/ trust [Section 2(1)(bb)] inserted w.e.f. 26.09.1994 by U.P. Act No.5 of 1995. It was also alleged in the plaint that tenant was defaulter. Tenant pleaded that U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 was applicable as building had been constructed much before 1990. In para-5 of the plaint, it was stated as follows:

(3.) Trial court/ J.S.C.C. Lucknow dismissed the suit on 30.05.1997. The plaintiff had asserted that rate of rent was Rs.480/- per month, however tenant asserted that the rate of rent was Rs.585/- per month and deposited the same in a case under Section 30 of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972. The trial court held that U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 was applicable to the building in dispute and tenant petitioner was not defaulter. Regarding applicability of Section 2(1)(bb), the trial court held that trust deed was not registered and it was not proved that it was public religious institution/ public charitable trust. Regarding date of construction, the trial court held that petitioner was admittedly continuing as tenant since 1981, hence year of construction was 1981. Against the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, landlord respondent No.2 filed revision being S.C.C. Revision No.88 of 1997, Kamakhyadham Charitiable Trust Baba Bhoot Nath Ashram Vs. Smt. Pratibha Verma. 13th A.D.J., Lucknow allowed the revision on 22.03.1999, set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and decreed the suit of the plaintiff for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent.