SHIV DAYAL MALHOTRA Vs. HARISH CHANDRA AND SONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. K. Mahajan, J. I have heard the matter after recalling the order, dated 3-5-1995 by virtue of which the revision was dismissed even though the revision was decided after going through record and a reasoned order was passed.

(2.) THE revision has arisen out of the following brief facts. THE dispute relates with respect to a shop situated at Jindal Bhawan, Railway Road, Aligarh. It was taken on rent at the rate of Rs. 320 per month by the tenant-applicant. THE plain tiff-respondents filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent from September, 1982 to December, 1982 at the rate of Rs. 160 per month and from January, 1983 to 31st March, 1983 for the sum of Rs. 960 as rent at the rate of Rs. 320 per month along with Rs. 32 as costs of the notice; total Rs. 1632. THE plea of subletting, default in payment of rent and material alterations have also been taken. Despite the notice terminating the tenancy, the rent was not paid.

(3.) SRI S. U. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant has attacked the order of the court below as perverse and unreasonable especially with respect to the sub letting and more emphasis has been laid down regard ing the increase of rent. He has also filed an application under Order XLI, Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure for leading addi tional evidence i. e. with respect to produc tion of counterfoil showing the rent at the rate of Rs. 160 per month. He has further submitted that he would like to produce the certified copy of the registration application in the Sales Tax Department dated 19-3-1981 of the firm Parsiddh Rana Boot House to show that the firm is a proprietorship of the sons of the applicant.