Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1272 (ALL)

State Of U. P. v. B. S. Yadav

2002-09-13

RAKESH TIWARI

body2002
JUDGMENT : - Rakesh Tiwari 1. HEARD the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The parties agree that after exchange of counter and rejoinder-affidavits, the revision be disposed of finally at the admission stage by this Court. 2. THE revisionists have filed the present revision against the judgment and decree dated 25.3.1989 passed by the XIth Additional District Judge, Bareilly in Suit No. 20 of 1985, B. S. Yadav v. State of U. P. and another. They have prayed for the relief that the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 25.3. 1989 passed by the lower court be set aside and such other relief to which this Court may deem fit and proper, may be granted to the revisionists. The brief facts of this case are that Original Suit No. 20 of 1985 was filed by the plaintiff-respondent in the Court of XIth Additional District Judge, Bareilly, for the reliefs of ejectment of the building and for recovery of arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 81,065-50 Paise. 3. THE relevant portions of the lease deed dated 3rd October, 1979, are being quoted below : FORM 30H (Annexure-A to Chapter XIII and Rule 24 to Appendix-X) (Standard lease for hiring private Buildings for Government purposes) This lease made on the third day of October, 1979 between Sri V. S. Yadav son of Sri C. P. Yadav caste Yadav resident of 35/15-3A Rampur Bagh, Civil Lines, Bareilly (hereinafter called "the lessor") of the one part AND the Governor of Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter) called "the lessee" of the other part witness as follows : (1) In consideration of the rent hereinafter reserved and of the covenants on the part of the lessee hereinafter contained the lessor hereby demise to the lessee for the purpose of the Office of the Joint Director, and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Bareilly all that land with the building and trees thereon fully described in the scheduled hereto together with all rights of easement and appurtenances whatever belonging or in any way appurtenant thereto to Hold the same to the lessee for a term of one year from the day of occupation paying therefor during the said term to the lessor or his authorized agent the monthly rent of Rs. 1,646 (Rupees one thousand, six hundred and forty six only) on the first day of the month succeeding that for which the rent is due, the first of such payments to be made on the first day of November, 1979. THE lessee hereby convenants with the lessor as follows : (1) That he shall, during the term hereby granted, pay to the lessor the monthly rent hereby reserved on the day and in the manner hereinbefore appointed : Provided that no rent shall be payable to the lessor for the period the premises are rendered unhabitable by reason of special or such other repairs being in progress or from any other cause. (2) That he shall after the expiration of the said term or sooner determination thereof peaceably and quietly surrender to the lessor the said premises : Provided always that if any part of the said rent shall be in arrear and unpaid for the space of three calendar months, whether the same shall have been lawfully demanded or not or if there shall be a breach of non-observance of any of the covenants by the lessee hereinbefore contained then in any such case the lessor may, notwithstanding the waiver of any previous cause or right or re-entry, re-enter upon the said premises and thereupon this demise shall absolutely determine. THE lessor hereby covenants with the lessee as follows : (1) That the lessee paying the rent hereby reserved may hold and enjoy the demised premises during the said term without any interruption by the lessor or any person whom-soever. (2) That he shall during the said term pay all rates, taxes (excluding water tax which shall be paid by the lessee), water meter will be provided and repaired by the lessor, assessments and charges whatsoever except those of a service character such as water, drainage and lighting taxes, scavenging tax and tax for cleaning the latrines and privies, now payable or hereafter to become payable in respect of the demised premises. THE water tax shall be payable by the lessee subject to 10% or less as may be assessed by the Municipal Board, Bareilly. THE sanitarywares (commodes, wash basins) shall be maintained in good order by the lessee and in case any damage is caused within a year, it shall be replaced at the cost of lessee. THE water tax shall be payable by the lessee subject to 10% or less as may be assessed by the Municipal Board, Bareilly. THE sanitarywares (commodes, wash basins) shall be maintained in good order by the lessee and in case any damage is caused within a year, it shall be replaced at the cost of lessee. (3) That the lessor shall at the request ; and cost of lessee at the end of the term of a year hereby granted execute to be lessee a new lease of the demised premises by way of renewal on the terms and conditions herein-before contained, except that the rent shall be at the prevailing rates of rent for similar class of buildings in the locality. (4) (b) That the tenancy hereby created shall be determinable at the option of either party by giving to the either party three calendar months' notice in writing. From the perusal of the lease deed quoted above, it is clear that the tenancy was for a period of one year. 4. ACCORDING to the revisionists, U. P. Ordinance No. 13 of 1972 is not applicable on the present tenancy and after the period given in the lease deed had expired, the defendants did not vacate the accommodation in question. It is submitted that it was agreed that after expiry of the period of lease, the rate of rent will be the rate which is prevailing in the locality. It was further claimed that 1646 sq. feet carpet/area of the building was in the possession of the defendants and Rs. 4.000 per month can be taken as rent of the same. On 31st October, 1982, the plaintiff asked the defendants to pay the rent at the rate of Rs. 2.25 sq. feet. The plaintiff agreed for taking the building on rent at the rate of Rs. 3,703 per month, but the defendants did not pay the rent, as such a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was served on the defendants and suit was filed after service of notice under Section 80, C.P.C. 5. THE suit was contested by the defendants on the ground that the lease deed was not registered. Therefore, there was no relationship between the landlord and the tenant and as such, the suit was not maintainable. THE suit was contested by the defendants on the ground that the lease deed was not registered. Therefore, there was no relationship between the landlord and the tenant and as such, the suit was not maintainable. On this basis, it was argued that the court below had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 6. THE court below decreed the suit for ejectment and for recovery of arrears of rent for Rs. 81,065 from 1.11.1982 to 31.7.1985 and after 1.8.1985 till the possession of the disputed building, the plaintiff is entitled to get Rs. 3,703 per month. Learned standing counsel representing the State has urged that the trial court has acted beyond jurisdiction. He states that since the lease deed was not a registered document, hence it cannot be accepted in evidence and as such, the relationship between the tenant and landlord was never created. The counsel for the respondents has also relied upon the findings given by the court below on issue Nos. 1 to 4 and has urged that after the amendment of U. P. Act No. 57 of 1976, any lease deed for more than one year requires registration. It is clear that before the amendment, the position of registration was different. The court below has held that after the amendment, it was mandatory for this lease deed in question to be registered for one year. 7. I have perused the judgment and record of the court below, it has rightly been held by the court below that the lease deed required registration and it has not exceeded its jurisdiction or acted with any material irregularities in decreeing the suit for ejectment and for recovery of arrears of rent till possession of the disputed building is given to the landlord. 8. NO other point has been pressed before this Court. For the reasons stated above, the revision is dismissed. The revisionists are directed to vacate the premises in dispute within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order and pay the arrears of rent to the respondent due from 1.11.1982 to 31.7.1985.