Civil Misc. Writ No. 10744 of 1981. Case: Smt. Bubboo Devi and Ors. Vs III Addl District Judge and Ors.. High Court of Allahabad (India)
| Case Number | Civil Misc. Writ No. 10744 of 1981 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: V.D. Ojha, Adv. and For Respondents: G.P. Bhargava, Adv. |
| Judges | S.D. Agarwala, J. |
| Issue | Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Reg. of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 - Sections 20, 30; Provincial Small Causes Court Act - Section 25; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order 15 Rule 5; Constitution of India - Article 226 |
| Citation | 1989 (1) AWC 258 (All) |
| Judgement Date | November 22, 1988 |
| Court | High Court of Allahabad (India) |
Judgment:
S.D. Agarwala, J.
-
This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India arising out of proceedings in a suit No. 312 of 1978 filed by Sri Sheo Murti Gupta, Respondent No. 3 against the Petitioners for ejectment and arrears of rent and damages. Sri. Sheo Murti Gupta is the landlord and the Petitioners are the tenants. The property in dispute is house No. 206/17, Pura Baldi, Kydganj, District Allahabad. The suit was filed on the allegation that Sheo Murti Gupta had purchased the accommodation in dispute on 4th January, 1978. It was further alleged that, thereafter, Sheo Murti Gupta further purchased arrears of rent also.
-
The Petitioners tenants contested the suit on the ground that in fact Sheo Murti Gupta was not the landlord. It was further urged that the Petitioners bad made the deposit under Section 30 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. It was further urged that on the first date of bearing, the Petitioners had deposited the entire arrears of rent as claimed in the suit and, consequently, the plea is taken in the written statement that the Petitioners were entitled to the benefit of Section 20 Sub-clause (4) of the Act.
-
The trial Court decreed the suit holding that the Petitioners were not entitled to the benefit of Section 20 Sub-clause (4) of the Act and, consequently, the decree for ejectment was passed against them on 7th March, 1979.
-
Aggrieved by the said decision, the Petitioners filed a civil revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act. The revision came up for hearing before the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Allahabad, who by his judgment dated 30th July, 1981 dismissed the revision.
-
The Petitioners have, consequently, challenged the judgments dated 7th March, 1979 and 30th July 1981 by means of the present petition.
-
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
-
Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has urged shat the view taken by the Courts below that the Petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of Section 20 Sub-clause (4) of the Act is a view manifestly erroneous.
-
The case of the Petitioners is that before the filing of the suit, they had deposited Rs. 140/- towards arrears of rent from 1st February, 1974 to 30th April, 1978 and, thereafter from 1st May, 1978 to 31st July, 1978 at the rate of Rs. 2.50 paise per mensem, total amount being Rs. 145/-. This deposit is alleged to have been made under Section 30 of the Act. It has been further alleged that on the first...
To continue reading
Request your trial