( 1. ) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 21st April, 2005 passed by the 11th Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Civil Suit No. 25-A/2002 decreeing the suit in part only for arrears of rent, the plaintiff has filed this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking decree of eviction and arrears @ 10% increase after every two year.

( 2. ) PLAINTIFFS case in brief is that plaintiff-appellant M/s Agrawal Medical Agencies is a registered partnership firm, wherein Ashish Agrawal, Ramesh Agrawal, Shyamlal Ji Agrawal and Smt. Indira Bai Agrawal are the partners. The defendant is the tenant of M/s Agrawal Medical Agencies of the Shop No..27, Jumerati, Bhopal according to the lease deed executed on 12-4-1993 at the rate ofRs. 2500/- per month. As per the terms of lease deed after every consecutive two years rent may be enhanced @ 10%. It is further said that w.e.f. 1-4-1999 rent at the rate of Rs. 3327/- is due against defendant which has not been paid upto 31-8-2000, total thereof comes to Rs. 26567.50. Even after notice of demand, rent was not paid, however Rs .19137/- fell further due till the date of filing the suit. Thus, decree of eviction and arrears of rent by increased rate along with mesne profits was prayed for.

The defendant by filing his written statement denied the existence of the registered partnership firm. It is said that the firm is not a registered one and the suit has been filed by the person who is authorised by the unregistered firm, which is not maintainable. The lease deed executed was only for the five years, thereafter, it has been non-opetational against defendant. It is also said, on account of the loss in business and poor financial status defendant was assured by Mr. Ramesh Agrawal, one of the partner to firm, that the rent shall not be enhanced from Rs. 3025/-, however, the defendant is the tenant by the said rate from 1999, and the rent by the said rate has been deposited on 22-4-2000, however, he is not in arrears thus the decree of eviction may be refused. It is also stated that advance rent of three months deposited by the defendant is with the plaintiff which has not been adjusted. The notice for payment of rent has not been served, therefore, the suit asking decree of eviction cannot be decreed..

( 3. ) DURING course of hearing, not disputed facts are that the defendant is the tenant of Shop No. 27, Jumerati, Bhopal, as per the lease deed (Exh. P-2). There is landlord-tenant relationship between them to the said shop w.e.f. 12-4-1993, and the period leased is for five years. The tenancy starts from 1st day of every English month and tenant has to pay the monthly rent of Rs. 2,500/- and every after two year increase of rent shall be @ 10% till expiry of the period of lease, i.e., five year.

( 4. ) ON the pleading the Trial Court has framed as many as 6 issues. Issue No. 1 relates to service of the notice and payment of the rent within two months from the date of its service. While deciding Issue No. 2 the Trial Court held that in terms of the lease deed (Exh. P-2) tenancy was at the rate of Rs. 2,500/- per month and after every two years 10% enhancement was agreed. The lease deed was not renewed arid the period came to an end in 1998. ON the said date rent was @ Rs.3,025/-. Due to non-renewal of lease, the plaintiff is not entitled to get 10% enhanced rate of rent after expiry of the period of five years w.e.f. 1st, April, 1998. Issue No. 3 regarding assurance given by Ramesh Agrawal of not enhancing rate of rent from Rs. 3,025/- was not found prove in view of the pleadings in written statement and the evidence brought on record. Issue No. 4 relates to non-payment of arrears of rent from 31-8-2000, which is decided in favour of plaintiffs. The Issue No. 5 regarding service of notice of demand to pay rent from the date of the service and the effect of non-service. While deciding Issue Nos.1 4 and 5 Trial Court held that as per Rule 15 of M.P. Accommodation Co