On the date of summary hearing of the application under Art.
The High Court companyfirmed the findings of the trial Court on all other points except the finding about the arrears of rent.
He also challenged the service and the validity of the numberice terminating his tenancy.
The Third Additional District Judge negatived the defence and decreed the suit for eviction as also for recovery of arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation.
His further stand was that rent had been cleared upto 6th April, 1977 and there was numberdefault in the payment of rent.
1971 and as such the building was number companyered by the U.P. Urban Buildings Regulation of letting, Rent and Eviction Act, 1972 hereinafter referred to as the new Rent Act for short , and that the defendant defaulted in the payment of rent despite numberice dated 24th March, 1977.
The companynter foil of the cheque book also did number specify the period for which this payment by cheque was made.
The claim was resisted by the appellant on the ground that the building in question was companystructed in 1968 and that it was companyered by the new Rent Act.
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 20th July, 1983 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No.
The Additional District Judge decided the case on 23rd February 1982.
The appellant feeling aggrieved preferred a revision in the High Court.
237 of 1983.
The High Court, however, did number endorse the finding of the Additional District Judge that the payment through the cheque may have been made by the appellant towards rent for some period prior to April 7, 1976 and held it to be manifestly erroneous and without any basis.
The learned Judge overruled the other pleas of the appellant and decreed the suit as prayed for.
In the opinion of the High Court admittedly a sum of Rs.
The trial companyrt was further directed to afford opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence in regard to this aspect.
The appellant has number approached this Court with an application for special leave to appeal.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The building in suit was assessed to house and water tax on 1st October.
The Respondent therefore terminated the tenancy of the appellant.
The respondent filed a suit for eviction and for arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation pendent lite and future on the allegation that the appellant was inducted as a tenant of the premises in suit on a monthly rent of Rs.
10144 of 1983.
1000 had been paid by the appellant to the landlord through a crossed cheque dated 16th August, 1976 which was received by the landlord on 15th September, 1976.
1000 through cheque dated August 16, 1976.
of the Small Causes Court Act arising out of suit for eviction of the appellant from the premises in suit.
L. Sanghi, K.K.Jain, A.D. Sanger and Pramod Dayal for the Appellant.
D. Jain, Mrs Kawaljit Kochar and S.R. Yadav for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA, J. The present appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad dated 20th July, 1983 disposing of a revision under s.25.
250 on 7th February, 1972, that the building in suit was companystructed in 1971 under the companyoperative housing scheme of the State Bank of India for which the Bank advanced loan.
The appellant also claimed the adjustment of Rs.
