M V SHANTHA Vs. RATAN LAL DALMIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The rule "ei incumbit probatio qui decit, non qui negat", i.e., the burden of proving a fact rests on the party who substantially asserts the affirmative and not upon the party who denies it; for a negative is usually incapable of proof - is the excuse offered by the tenant for his non-examination and whether this contention is justified is the main issue raised in this Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) The landlord is the Revision Petitioner.

(3.) The landlord and the tenant entered into a lease agreement, dated 01.04.1990, under which, the monthly rent was fixed at Rs.4,000/-. The extent of occupation is 1,575 sq.ft., The location of the property is in the posh area of Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai. The husband of the landlord had been suffering from paralytic attack and for the purpose of taking treatment, at Chennai, the landlord wanted to get back the possession. The request of the landlord to vacate the premises went in vain and that made the landlord to file the application for eviction.