BARSATI RAM Vs. RAMJIT DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment both the revision petitions namely Civil Revision No. 7012 and 1713 of 1999 can conveniently be disposed of together. Both the revision petitions are inter se between the same parties involving the same premises. Thus, they are being taken up together.

(2.) The relevant facts are that respondent Ramji Das had filed the petition for eviction against the petitioner with respect to the property in dispute. It was asserted that Smt. Kailash Wati widow of Ujjagar Singh was the owner of the house. She has let out the premises to the petitioner. Kailash Wati executed a registered Will in favour of the respondent on 13.4.1981 and thereupon the respondent became the owner-landlord of the property. The petitioner was asserted to have not paid the arrears of rent from 1.7.1971 at the rate of Rs. 150/- P.M. Plea was raised that petitioner had been let out the property for residential purpose but he has changed the user of the premises and started doing the business of cloth. Lastly, it was asserted that the suit property has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. Reply had been filed. The petitioner contested the petitions for eviction. It was alleged that respondent is not the landlord of the property. The Will set up by the respondent was described to be forged. Plea was raised that Kailash Wati never married to the respondent. She was the widow of Ujjagar Singh. During her life time she never re-married. Being the widow she was exempted from payment of house tax. It was further asserted that the plea of the respondent that they were married at Haridwar is not correct. As per the petitioner, Kailash Wati was 65 years old while the respondent is 35 years old and question of their marrying did not arise. The rent was described to be Rs. 30/- P.M.

(3.) The learned Rent Controller framed the issues and recorded the evidence. It was held that there was a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Since the rent had not been tendered, the order of eviction as such had been passed. The petitioner preferred an appeal. The learned Appellate Authority also concluded that there is a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Reliance was placed on the fact that in the Hospital record when Kailash Wati died, the respondent was described to be her husband and even in the municipal record specifically he has been shown to be as such. The appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been filed.