UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIES

COLLEGE OF LEGAL STUDIES

BBA.LL.B COPORATE LAWS

SEMESTERV
ACADEMIC YEAR: 2018 SESSION: JULY-DECEMBER

FIRST APPEAL

Under the Supervision of Ma’am Arpi Jain

Submitted By:
NAME: RUPENDRA SINGH RATHORE
SAP NO: 500053966
ROLL NO: R760216094
 Before the Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital

First Appeal No. of 2018

(Marriage petition No. 81 of 2018)
Shri. Ashish Kumar age 30 years, resident of 350 Nivedita Kunj Saket, Delhi 1100117
………….Petitioner

Versus
Shri. _ Abhishek Gupta _age 33 years, occupation - service, resident of 350 Nivedita
Kunj Saket Delhi 1100117. )

………………Opposite Parties/Respondents

Appeal U/s 13 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act,
1972.

LIMITATION

Impugned Judgment passed on 22.12.2018

Certified Copy applied on 22.12.2018

Certified copy received on 22.12.2018

Appeal filed on 26.12.2018

 Hence this appeal is being filed within period of limitation.
Sir,

The above-named appellant is filing this present appeal aggrieved by the Judgment & Order dated
22.12.2018, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehradun in original suit No.
81 of 2018, Abhishek Gupta v Ashish Kumar, whereby the complaint of the Complainant was
dismissed.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

1. That a lease agreement was entered by Appellant with respondent for a house situated at
Ballupur, Dehradun on 1 October 2017 for eleven months (11 months).
2. That Mr. Abhishek Gupta (respondent) is absolute owner of property i.e. house no. 3
consisting a fully furnished 2BHK house with khasra no. 124/6, situated at Devi colony,
Prayag Road, Ballupur, Dehradun.
3. That the tenant i.e. Appellant has to give 7000/month to plaintiff as rent including all
other charges like electricity and water bills etc.
4. That Mr. Abhishek Gupta being a responsible citizen warned defendant not to carry out
any illegal activity in property premises otherwise he will not renew the agreement for
lease.
5. That a suit for recovery of money and possession of property was filed by respondent in
Court of civil judge (junior division) as appellant was alleged for not paying 4 (four)
months’ rent and had exceeded his rent agreement for 20 days without renewing that
agreement. Also, respondent made some allegations that appellant has carried out some
illegal activities like drug peddling and acting as a pimp at the suit premises.
6. That respondent has warned appellant many times orally and through notice, for vacating
property and not to carry out any illegal activity there, for which respondent did not
received any reply in either form from defendant and appellant is liable to pay Rs.
33600/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum for arrears of rent.
7. However, it is a trial court finding that Appellant did not willfully exceeded the agreement.
He has not received any notice from respondent at any of his residence or office. Appellant
had contented that respondent has exempted him from paying rent monthly when he had
 paid respondent the rent for 5th month. It was a face to face conversation between them.
Respondent allowed him to pay rent of rest of months, in one time after expiry of lease,
when he has enough amount.
8. Besides having exemption appellant had paid rent of rest of month to respondent at
appellant’s village house where respondent came to see appellant’s father as he was ill.
Villagers had seen him at appellant’s residence in village.
9. Also, he was not residing in suit premises for last 6 months as his father was ill and was on
his death bed. His condition was serious throughout august and he passed away on 6
October. Appellant had not enough money to pay rent for extra days for which his
belongings are kept in suit premises and thus he called respondent on 12th October and
other days too for granting of time to vacate the place but his phone was unreachable as he
did not have any other place to shift his belongings.
10. Appellant could not produce any payment evidence because he made all transactions in
cash of which receipts were not provided by respondent.
11. Upon consideration of the evidence adduced by the parties and the submissions made by
the respective parties, the Ld. court allowed the rent suit on the ground of default in
payment of rent by the Appellant-defendants and also directed him to handover peaceful
and vacant possession of the property to the respondent-plaintiff.
12. That the Ld. court passed the judgment on 22.12.2018 in favor of respondents and.
13. The impugned Judgment has been passed by the Ld. Court, completely ignoring the
material on record, which are set out below:-

GROUNDS OF APPEAL
1. Because the Ld. court failed to consider this fact that the Evidences were enough to prove
appellant’s innocence and necessity of not vacating the place.
2. Because the Ld. Forum failed to consider this fact that no evidence was produced in court
which can prove that appellant was involved in some illegal activities like drug peddling
and acting as a pimp at the suit premises.
3. Because the Ld. court failed to appreciate this fact that Respondent was malafide in his
intention to get extra money as rent from petitioner.
 4. Because the ld. Court erred in not considering this fact that in the present case there was
ample of evidence, which portrayed the malafide intention of the respondent and deliver
justice to the petitioner.
5. Because the impugned Judgment is even otherwise bad, illegal and is liable to be set aside
and petition of the petitioner/Appellant was liable to be allowed.

It is therefore most humbly prayed: -

1. That the impugned Judgment/order dated 22.12.2018 be set aside and the petition of the
Appellant is liable to be allowed for all reliefs claimed.
2. That full cost of the appeal be awarded to the appellant.
3. That any other order as the Hon’ble Commission may deem fit and proper be also passed
in favor of the Opposite Party/Appellant.

Dated: 26.12.2018 Counsel for Appellant

Dehradun.
Presented by

(Vijendra Pratap Singh Chauhan, Advocate)

Counsel for the petitioner/Appellant