Back
AJIT KUMAR
Engineer Prabhu Dayal Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
Joint Registrar Co-Operative Society – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rahul Malviya, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.
2. This revision application has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.12.2022 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff.
3. As many as five issues were framed. While the issue no.1 is qua damage caused to the property by the tenant, issue no.2 is qua non-application of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act No.13 of 1972). The most crucial issue is the third issue as to whether the plaintiff has been able to determine the tenancy by issuance of notice. The entitlement of the plaintiff for damages @ Rs.600/- per day as issue no.4 and default in payment of rent by the defendant-respondent being issue no.5 have all been decided against the plaintiff.
4. The submission advanced by learned counsel for the revision-applicant is, when the trial court had determined issue no.2 against the defendant-respondent holding that Act No.13 of 1972 did not apply, the Court was neither to see the default in payment of arrears of rent, nor could have seen into the niceties with
A notice is essential for terminating tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, and default in rent payment is irrelevant if the Rent Control Act does not apply.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that compliance with the legal provisions regarding rent payment and termination of tenancy is essential, and the court has the discretion to grant....
The failure to consider crucial evidence and make specific findings can render a judgment perverse and warrant its quashing.
The requirement under Section 106 for notice termination to coincide with the tenancy month is not mandatory for justice, equity, or good conscience.
The validity of an eviction notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act is upheld when the tenant fails to pay rent, confirming the jurisdiction of civil courts to hear eviction cases.
The court affirmed that a month-to-month lease can be terminated by a 30-day notice, rejecting claims of an annual lease due to lack of evidence.
A tenant's vague denial of allegations regarding property age does not meet the burden of proof required to contest eviction under the applicable laws.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
