PRAKASH CHANDRA Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE, BANDA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.K. Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents tenants.

(2.) The petitioner had filed S.C.C. Suit No. 13 of 1993 for eviction of the respondent tenant on the ground of arrears of rent. The Trial Court found that the rent of the premises was Rs. 100.00 per month and respondent had defaulted in payment of the same. Consequently, it decreed the suit for arrears of rent and eviction. The tenant filed S.C.C. Revision No. 7 of 1996 wherein the Revisional Court concurred with the finding of Trial Court with respect to validity of notice. On the question of rate of rent the Revisional Court had set aside the finding of the Trial Court and held that the rate of rent payable by the respondent tenant was Rs. 35/per month. Having recorded the aforesaid finding it was held that since the respondent tenant had deposited the rent at the rate of Rs. 35/- per month hence he was not in arrears of rent and consequently proceeded to allow the revision and set aside the order of J.S.C.C.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the finding recorded by the Trial Court on issue No. 2 to the effect that rent of accommodation was Rs. 100.00 per month is based on cogent evidence in as much as the Trial Court has considered that a portion of the building was under the tenancy of brother of the respondent No. 2 namely Prem Chandra and after the death of Prem Chandra his son Mukesh Kumar is living in the said tenancy on the rent of Rs. 35/- per month. It is the case of the petitioner that rent of the accommodation at Rs. 35/- per month was with respect to Prem Chandra and to that effect the relevant record was produced. The Trial Court while considering the aforesaid record has recorded a finding that there are four rooms in the occupation of the respondent No. 2 which is situated in the heart of the city and hence rent of the same would be Rs. 100.00 per month. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the aforesaid finding has been illegally set aside by the Revisional Court on the basis that in the extract of tax assessment for the year 1986 to 1991 the rent payable by the respondent tenant has been shown to be Rs. 100.00 per month. He submits that the Revisional Court while discussing the extract of tax assessment has illegally held that the entry is fictitious. The relevant portion is quoted hereunder :