IMPORTANT POINT
Tenants must obtain written consent for material alterations; failure to do so can justify eviction under the relevant tenancy laws.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment and order dated 30.01.2023 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge, Haldwani in S.C.C. Revision No. 04 of 2019, whereby the said court dismissed the revision and affirmed the judgment and order dated 30.01.2019 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Haldwani in S.C.C. Suit No. 11 of 2015.

2. Heard.

3. Admit the petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/tenants would submit that the respondent/landlord filed Suit No.11 of 2015 against the petitioners/tenants for ejectment on the grounds of non-payment of rent and also making material structural alterations in the tenanted property without taking permission in writing from the respondent/landlord; that, the Small Causes Court, Haldwani vide judgment and order dated 30.01.2019 (annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition) observed that the petitioners/tenants have deposited the entire rental amount before the trial court, however, gave the benefit of Section 20(2)(c) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short ‘the Act No. 13 of 1972’) and decreed the suit in favour of the respondent/landlord on the ground that material alteration was done by the petitioners/tenants in the tenanted property without taking permission from the respondent/landlord and thereby diminishing its value.

5. He would further submit that aggrieved by judgment and order dated 30.01.2019, the petitioners/tenants preferred S.C.C. Revision No.04 of 2019 before the court of 2nd Additional District Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital; that, the Revisional Court vide judgment and order dated 30.01.2023 (annexed as Part-II of Annexure No.1 to the writ petition) dismissed the said revision and affirmed the judgment and order dated 30.01.2019 passed by the Small Causes Court. Hence, this writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners/tenants would submit that both the impugned judgments passed by the courts below are unsustainable in the eyes of law as the petitioners/tenants have already deposited the entire rental amount before the trial court and have not made any permanent partition in the tenanted property and have only made temporary partition by a wooden ply; that, the respondent/landlord did not plead or give any evidence regarding the measurement of shop in dispute or the alleged partition; that, the alleged partition was not examined by any Expert, Architect or Engineer to prove the allegations made in the plaint by the respondent/landlord; that, the respondent/landlord did not examine any witness of the locality, where the shop in question was situated, to prove the case of material alteration; that, the testimony given by the respondent/landlord is not supported by any evidence; that, the burden of proving the case under Section 20(2)(c) of the Act No. 13 of 1972 was upon the respondent/landlord and respondent/landlord miserably failed to prove its case; that, the trial court has not framed proper issue in terms of Section 20(2)(c) of the Act No. 13 of 1972 while dealing with the subject matter of material alteration.

7. In support of his case, he referred the judgment of Vishwanath Prasad Jaiswal Vs. Satya Narain Sharma (2014) 16 SCC 784, whereby Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the landlord on the ground of non-availability of evidence on record to prove that the material alteration made in the tenanted premises by the tenant diminished the value and utility of the tenanted property and held that the landlord is not entitled to any benefit of Section 20(2)(c) of the Act No. 13 of 1972 under such circumstances. He also places reliance upon various judgments on the same point of law.

8. Counsel for the petitioners/tenants would further submit that in the written statement (annexed as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition) filed by the petitioners /tenants, it was specifically