The judgment establishes the legal principles related to exemption from Rent Control Act, determination of rent, recovery of utility charges, and granting time to vacate premises.

Vishnu Chandra Gupta, J.

Heard Sri Narendra Mohan, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party-tenant.

2. By means of this revision under Section 25 of Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, the judgment and decree dated 23rd April, 2008 has been challenged by which a decree has been passed against the revisionist for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent and damages, telephone charges and electricity charges.

3. The brief facts for deciding the revision in short are that the residential premises situated in Civil Lines, Jhansi was let out to tenant-revisionist @ Rs. 2,100/- per month apart from electricity and telephone charges payable by the tenant. The premises was a new construction of the year 1991-92, thus, the provisions of the Rent Control Act are not applicable for the reason that the building is newly constructed and the rent is more than Rs. 2,000/-. The tenant defaulted in payment of rent from 1st August, 2001. A notice of demand along with the termination of tenancy under Section 106 of T.P. Act was served upon the revisionist. The revisionist replied the same. When the notice was not complied with, the plaint suit was filed by the landlord. The suit was contested by filing the written statement by the revisionist-tenant. After adducing the evidence by the parties, the suit was decreed by the Trial Court. While decreeing the suit, it was held that premises in question is exempted from operation of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The rate of rent is Rs. 2,100/- per month, the tenant is in arrears of rent from 1st August, 1981 and has also not paid telephone bills and the electricity charges and it passed the decree of ejectment disbelieving the statement and evidence given by the tenant and believing the evidence of the plaintiff.

4. So far as the finding regarding the exemption of operation of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 is concerned, the same is based on documentary evidence which includes the sale-deed of the year 1989. The permission obtained for constructing the house thereon is of the year 1990 and the assessment of the house by the Municipal Authorities was made in the year 1991-92. Contrary to it, the oral evidence has been given by the tenant that too on the basis of heresay evidence. Hence, I do not find any perversity or illegality in the finding recorded by the Trial Court.

5. So far as the finding recorded regarding rate of rent is concerned, it had been categorically admitted by the tenant in his oral statement that he maintained a diary/copy, in which he entered the payment of rent paid to the landlord. But admittedly that diary/copy has not been brought on record nor produced in the Court below. The landlord has adduced the evidence of himself as well as of other witnesses in whose presence the rent was determined at the rate of Rs.2,100/- per month. In view of the above, the finding recorded by the Trial Court regarding rate of rent cannot be said to be illegal or without any material on record. As such it does not require interference by this Court.

6. It is not in dispute that the notice was served and the same was replied. The legality of notice has not been challenged. The relationship of landlord and the tenant is also admitted. Hence In view of the findings recorded by the Trial Court, it cannot be said that the suit has wrongly been decreed for ejectment and arrears of rent and damages.

7. It has been contended by the counsel for the tenant that telephone charges and electricity charges are not part of the rent so order passed for recovery thereof is liable to be set aside. The learned counsel appearing for the landlord fairly conceded that so far as the amount of telephone charges and the electricity charges are concerned, they cannot be recovered as part of rent nor any decree could be passed in respect thereof in the suit. Therefore, so far as the decree relating to recovery of telephone charges and electricity charges are