KESHAV KUMAR ARORA Vs. ATMA NAND JAIN SABHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner i.e. the tenant filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, Patiala, against the order dated September 15, 2000, passed by the Rent Controller, Patiala. During the pendency of the appeal, an application for permission to adduce additional evidence has been filed under Section 15(3) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") read with Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The thrust is to prove on record the original cheques dated November 3, 1995 for Rs. 10,000/-, dated December 5, 1995 for Rs. 4800/- and also dated December 31, 1995 for Rs. 15000/- along with two site plans with the sale deed dated January 18, 1991. It shall be appropriate to notice here that the petitioner has been ordered to be evicted on the ground of short tender of the rent whereas the claim of the petitioner is that the rent in fact had been enhanced from Rs. 2300/- to Rs. 2400/- and the same was reduced to Rs. 1000/- per month on the ground of having vacated some portion of the tenancy. This plea has not been accepted by the learned Rent Controller and consequently, the order of eviction has been passed.

(2.) TO substantiate his plea an application for producing additional evidence has been filed before the Appellate Authority which has been contested by the respondent-landlord. The Appellate Authority dismissed the application vide order March 26, 2001. Aggrieved of this order, the present petition has been filed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that the Appellate Authority has fallen into error by strictly applying Order 41 rule 27 C.P.C. and has, therefore, come to erroneous conclusion that proper judgment can be pronounced in the absence of the additional evidence sought to be produced by the petitioner-landlord. The argument is that in view of the specific provision contained in the Act, under Section 15(3) of the Act, the powers of the Appellate Authority are unfettered for granting permission to lead additional evidence. It shall be apposite to read the said provision which is reproduced as hereunder :-