A.F.R.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:3355 Reserved on 02.08.2024 Delivered on 08.01.2025 Case :- CIVIL REVISION No. - 205 of 2009 Revisionist :- Suresh Kumar Sharma And Others Opposite Party :- M/S Khanna Automobiles And Others Counsel for Revisionist :- A.K.Gupta, ,Ashish Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- ,Pankaj Agarwal,Rahul Pandey,S.Niranjan Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Sri P.K. Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ashish Agrawal, learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri D.P. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Rahul Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents/Opposite Parties.

2. The revisionists are the plaintiffs in S.C.C. Suit No.63 of 2008 and have preferred the present Revision against the judgement and order dated 08.04.2009 passed by the District Judge/Judge, Small Causes Court, Ghaziabad whereby he has dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs/revisionists.

3. For the convenience, the revisionists are referred to as 'plaintiffs' and respondents are referred to as 'defendants'.

4. The plaintiffs instituted S.C.C. Suit No.63 of 2008 for eviction of the defendants from Shop No.3 situated at Ground Floor Building, Nagar Nigam No.537-A, Purva Ismail Khan being constructed on G.D.A. Plot No.56, Ambedkar Road, Ghaziabad (hereinafter referred to as the ‘shop’).

5. The plaintiffs’ case is that the defendants are the tenants of the shop, of which plaintiffs’ mother was the owner, and after her death on 24.05.2008, the plaintiffs being legal heirs became the owner of the shop.

6. It is stated that in S.C.C. Suit No.33 of 2003, a compromise was entered into between the parties on 01.10.2008 in which it was agreed that the rent of the shop would be Rs.4200/-. The defendants paid the rent at the rate of Rs.4200/- for the month of October, 2008 under the compromise.

7. It is further stated that the defendants had deposited Rs.3,50,000/- with the mother of the plaintiffs as a security, which the plaintiffs are liable to return to the defendants at the time of vacation of the shop by the defendants.

8. Further case of the plaintiffs was that the building in which the shop is situated was constructed in the year 1988, and the First Assessment of the shop was done on 01.04.1989, and since the rent of the shop was more than Rs.2000/-, therefore, the provision of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 is not applicable, and the plaintiffs can terminate the tenancy of defendants at ‘will’. Accordingly, the plaintiffs served a notice dated 01.11.2008 under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act by registered post to the defendants terminating the tenancy of the defendants which notice was served upon the defendants on

05.11.2008

9. Further case of the plaintiffs is that the defendants are liable to pay rent of Rs.4900/- for the period from 01.11.2008 to 05.12.2008 at the rate of Rs.4200/- per month. Accordingly, the plaintiffs prayed for a decree of eviction alongwith the damages and other relief against the defendants.

10. The suit was contested by the defendants by filing written statement contending inter-alia that the defendants were tenants of mother of the plaintiffs namely, Late Bimla Devi at the rate of Rs.1130/- per month. It is further stated that by mutual agreement, it has been agreed that the rent is to be increased by 10% in every three years and the entire rent was paid by the defendants during the lifetime of Late Bimla Devi.

11. It is further stated that in the S.C.C. Suit No.33 of 2003 (Bimla Devi Vs. M/s. Khanna Automobiles) instituted by Late Bimla Devi, a compromise was entered into between the parties i.e. Late Bimla Devi and defendants on 25.09.2007 in the Court of 3^rd Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad which was verified on 20.01.2008, whereby it was agreed that the rent of the shop will be Rs.4000/- per month w.e.f. 01.10.2007, and there will be increase in the rent at the rate of 5% every year. It is further stated that the defendants have been paying the rent at the rate of Rs.4200/- per month currently.