Dismissed

Deepak Singh v. Jhallar and Another

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2019A227/2645/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Article 227 writ petition, the High Court dismissed the challenge against an eviction and rent recovery decree. The Court found no error or irregularity in the lower courts' findings regarding the landlord-tenant relationship, valid notice, and default in rent payment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with no interference in the impugned orders of courts below.

Deepak Singh Vs Jhallar and Another — Landlord and Tenant | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 26

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2645 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Deepak Singh Respondent :- Jhallar And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheikh Moazzam Inam,Aftab Ahamad

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sheikh Moazzam Inam, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶6

By means of the present petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the judgment dated 20.09.2014 passed by the Small Causes Court, Varanasi in Suit No.53 of 2007 (Champa Devi & Ors. Vs. Deepak Singh) and also the order dated 10.01.2019 passed by the Additional District Judge-XV Varanasi in Revision No.20 of 2014 (Deepak Singh Vs. Jhallar & Anr.) whereby the revision filed there against by the petitioner has been dismissed.

¶7

Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondents-landlord filed a suit for eviction and recovery of the arrears of rent against the petitioner which was decreed vide judgment dated 09.08.2017. Upon considering the facts of the case, pleadings of the parties and the evidence on record concurrent findings of fact have been recorded by the courts below that the defendanttenant had defaulted in payment of rent, and that notice had been validly served upon him and in terms thereof his tenancy has been terminated. It has also been held that the defendanttenant was not entitled to the benefit of Section 20 (4) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, since the rent deposited by him was from March, 2006 whereas he was in arrears since March 2004. The relationship of landlord-tenant between the plaintiff and the defendant has also been held to be established.

¶8

The notice terminating his tenancy having been validly served and the petitioner being arrears of rent having been held to be established by the courts below on the basis of the evidence on record, the orders passed cannot be faulted with.

¶9

Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any irregularity or error in the orders passed by the courts below so as to warrant interference.

¶10

The petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 12.4.2019 Pratima

¶12

(Dr. Y.K.Srivastava,J.)

Deepak Singh v. Jhallar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Singh v. Jhallar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hanif Vs Mohammad Arif and 4 Others

Man Mohan Kulsheshtra Alias Manmohan Vs Judge Small Causes Court, Aligarh and 8 Others

Jeenat Parvin Vs Masqoor Khan and 5 Others

The Co-Operative Assurance Company Limited Vs Rent Control Eviction Officer /City Magistrate and Another

Ajay Arora and 5 Others Vs Luxmi Narayan Gupta and Another

Smt. Shanti Devi and 6 Others Vs Sawan Shukla and 2 Others