The main legal point established is the court's discretion in granting time for the defendant to vacate the premises in a landlord and tenant dispute.

JUDGMENT :

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

1. The revision before this Court was preferred by the revisionist under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act. A challenge has been given to the judgment of 30.10.2017, as has been rendered by the court of learned J.S.C.C./District Judge, Rudraprayag in S.C.C. Suit No. 01 of 2015, Anil Kala vs. Rakesh Verma by virtue of which the suit of the respondent/landlord for rent and eviction was decreed and as a consequence thereto, the petitioner/tenant was directed to vacate the disputed tenement shop.

2. The brief facts, which engaged consideration in the present S.C.C. Revision, were that the plaintiff has leased out the disputed shop to the defendant by virtue of lease deed of 01.07.2000 executed in his favour carrying a monthly rent of Rs. 3,000/- per month. It was further agreed between the parties that the said rent would be subject to a condition of 10% enhancement for each year and ultimately at the time when the suit in question was instituted, the tenement in question was carrying a rent of Rs. 5,000/- per month.

3. The suit, thus instituted was on the ground that the revisionist/tenant, since had violated the terms of the lease, hence his tenancy was terminated by the landlord/respondent by virtue of legal notice issued on 15.01.2015, which was admittedly served upon him, calling upon him to pay the arrears of rent of Rs. 1,80,000/- and also to hand over the vacant possession of the shop in question. The tenancy was expressed to be terminated.

4. The suit was contested and the defendant/revisionist, he has filed the written statement Paper No. 24 Ga/1. He admitted the fact of creation of a tenancy by virtue of the lease deed of 01.07.2000, but he denied the averments made pertaining to the shop, which was made on the Government land and also denied the fact of having committed the default and with regards to the arrears of rent, which was claimed by the plaintiff/respondent herein. The parties lead their respective evidence and particularly, the plaintiff/respondent has placed reliance on Paper No. 8 Ga 2; which was legal notice of terminating the tenancy and the lease agreement Paper No. 11 Ga/1, apart from that the oral testimony of the plaintiff was also recorded as P.W.1. The defendant/revisionist contested the proceedings recorded his oral statement of D.W.1 and has also adduced one Mr. Roshan Verma as D.W.2 and Nand Kishore Verma, as D.W.3 in support of his contention, who too supported the stand taken as a defence in the written statement Paper No. 21 Ga 1. On the basis of the pleadings exchanged between the parties the point of determination was framed by the learned trial, court which are enumerated herein below:-

"6. On the basis of pleadings, evidence & submission of the parties, the following points for determination are involved in the matter:-

i. Whether plaintiff & defendant had the relationship of landlord & tenant at the time of institution of the suit?

ii. Whether the defendant had committed default in payment of arrears of rent of Rs. 1,80,000?

iii. Whether the provisions of U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act 13 of 1972 are not applicable on the shop?

iv. Whether the plaintiff terminated the tenancy of the defendant by legal notice dated 15.01.2015?

v. Whether this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the matter?

vi. Is the plaintiff entitled to get any relief in this case? If yes, then what?"

5. The learned trial court after appreciating the evidence and considering the documents, which was brought on record had ultimately decreed the suit and directed the defendant/revisionist to vacate the premises and to hand over the vacant possession of the shop. But however the determination of the arrears of rent in relation thereto, the defaulted period, it was partially decreed with regards to the arrears and manse profits of Rs. 1,54,000/- as an occupancy charges, which were determined to be payable at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month, ever