MEHAR ELAHI Vs. VERHA MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an order passed by the Rent Control Tribunal holding that the petition for fixation of standard rent of the respondent was within time and fixing of Rs. 75.00 as standard rent in place of Rs. 175.00 which was the rent being paid by the respondent right from the inception of his tenancy.

(2.) The facts, in brief, of this case are that the respondent filed a petition for fixation of standard rent on 4.2.1972 on the basis of an alleged rent note dated 22nd February, 1971 accepting the attornment of lease in favour of the present petitioner w.e.f. I.I 1.70. The property in question was purchased by the present appellant on 31st March,1968 and at the time of purchase also the present respondent was in occupation of the shop and was paying a rent of Rs. 175.00 per month though to the tenant in his capacity as sub-tenant.

(3.) The matter was first heard by the Additional Rent Controller Shri Jaspal Singh (as he then was) for the purpose of fixation of standard rent and he passed the interim order and expressed a prima facie view that the petition was barred by limitation as provided under Section 12(b)(ii) of the Delhi Rent Control Act which provides that where the application is made by the tenant, the limitation would be two years from the date the premises were let out to him. Under Section 2(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act the term 'tenant' has been defined to include a sub-tenant also. The respondent on the date of presentation of the petition for fixation of standard rent had already been in possession thereof though as a sub-tenant for nearly eight years and when he was accepted as tenant by the head lessor/ petitioner, there was no change in the rate of rent. The Tribunal and the Additional Rent Controller had fallen into error in coming to the conclusion that the cause of action arose for presenting the petition for fixation of standard rent to the respondent from the date of the execution of the rent note when the said sub-tenant was accepted as a direct tenant under him by the purchaser of the property. It was not the case where the respondent had come into possession on the execution of the said rent note but only a question of fact of his status being changed from that of subtenant to that of a tenant without any change in the rate of rent. In every other respect, the liability of the respondent continued to be the same and he continued to pay Rs. 175.00 as rent which act is acknowledged by him in the said rent note. The rent note is an unilateral acknowledgement of the terms of tenancy by tenant and is not executed by both the parties. In the present case, the rent note though originally signed by the tenant, but at the bottom bears the endorsement of the landlord with the remarks "he has accepted the terms". That endorsement makes this document a bilateral document and it takes the colour of lease deed and ceases to be a rent note. It is not a case where the landlord had merely acknowledged the receipt of the original on the duplicate on the rent note. It is not a unilateral document signed by the tenant only which would not attract the application of Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 49 of the Registration Act. On account of execution of the same by both the parties it assumed the character of a lease deed and any lease deed to be created in writing even if its registration is not compulsory under Section 17 of the Registration Act would require to be registered under Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act and under the provision of Section 49 of the Registration Act. The provisions of the said Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 49 of the Registration Act read as under : Section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act: Leases how made.-A lease of immovable property from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year or reserving a yearly rent, can be made only by a registered instrument. All other leases of immovable property may be made either by a registered instrument or by oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession. Where a lease of immovable property is made by a registered instrument, such instrument or, where there are more instruments than one, each such instrument shall be executed by both the lessor and the lessee: Provided that the State Government may from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that leases of immovable property, other than leases from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent, or any class of such leases, may be made by registered instrument or by oral agreement without delivery of possession. Section 49 ofthe Registration Act : Effect of non-registration of documents required to be registered.-No document required by Section 17 {or by any provision ofthe Transfer of Property Act,1882 (4 of 1882),] to be registered shall-