The central legal point established in the judgment is that material alterations to a tenanted building without written permission from the landlord, as specified in the relevant act, constitute grounds for eviction.

( 1 ) THIS is tenants writ petition arising out of suit for eviction filed by respondent No. 3 Anand chand Man Singh (since deceased and survived by Legal Representatives) against petitioner shiv Shanker Awasthi (since deceased and survived by Legal Representatives ). The suit was registered as Suit (S. C. C. Suit) No. 34 of 1981. The main ground taken in the suit for eviction of the tenant was material alteration. Earlier also, an eviction suit had been filed by the landlord against tenant. In the said suit compromise was entered into and tenant delivered possession of a small portion of the tenanted accommodation to the landlord and landlord under the said agreement constructed a wall to separate the portion which was left in the tenancy occupation of the tenant from other portions in occupation of other tenants. In the suit-giving rise to the instant writ petition, tenant on the one hand pleaded that under the compromise entered into in S. C. C. Suit No. 20 of 1974 tenant was entitled to raise constructions. Tenant further took up the case that after the said compromise landlord permitted him to make constructions. Tenant also took up third case and pleaded that all the constructions had been made by the landlord. Copy of the earlier compromise in S. C. C. Suit No. 20 of 1974 has been filed as Annexure C. A. J to the counter affidavit. In the said compromise no permission was granted to the tenant to make any constructions. In the suit giving rise to the instant writ petition Commissioner was also appointed who reported that tenant had made 4 Varandahs, staircase, septic tank on the ground floor and 3 varandahs on the first floor. Initially, only ground floor was in the tenancy occupation of the tenant.

( 2 ) TRIAL Court on the one hand held that constructions had been made by the landlord. Thereafter trial court held that landlord had orally permitted the tenant to raise the constructions. Thereafter trial court held that the constructions had neither diminished the value nor utility of the accommodation in dispute. Trial court ultimately on 29. 10. 1983 dismissed the suit, for eviction and permitted the plaintiff to withdraw the amount, which the tenant had deposited under Section 20 (4) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Against the judgment and decree passed by the trial court/ j. S. C. C. /munsif Fatehpur dated 29. 10. 1983 landlord respondent No. 3 filed S. C. C Revision No. 113 of 1983. The Revisional Court/ A. D. J. (Special Judge) Fatehpur reversed the findings of the trial court. Revisional Court held that the constructions were made by the tenant and they diminished the value and utility of the building and materially altered the same. Revisional Court rightly observed that landlord had stated in his statement that constructions raised by the defendants would have cost Rupees 20 to 25 thousands. Trial court wrongly held that both the parties had admitted that constructions costed about rupees 4 to 5 thousands. In the written statement, copy of which is annexure 4 to the writ petition, in paragraph 23 it was stated by the tenant that under oral agreement (Jabani Samjhauta) entered into in the year 1976 in between him and the landlord, tenant surrendered some portion of the accommodation in his tenancy (occupation) and in consideration thereof landlord got constructed latrine, varandah, staircase and Dochhatti in the end of 1976. Tenant did not say any thing about written agreement, which had been entered into in between the parties in S. C. C. Suit No. 20 of 1974. The said agreement was entered into in December 1976 and accepted by the Court on 18. 1. 1977. When written agreement had been entered into, no evidence of oral agreement to set up an altogether different agreement was admissible. Under Section 20 (2) (c) of the Act a tenant is liable to eviction if he has, without the permission in writing of the landlord, made or permitted to be made any such constructions or structural alterations in the buil