MOHAN SINGH Vs. JOGINDER LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved against the order passed by the appellate authority holding that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and consequently, dismissed the ejectment petition filed by them.

(2.) The petitioners sought ejectment of the respondent, inter-alia, on the ground that the respondent is in arrears of rent since 1.1.1980 at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month. However, the respondent denied the relationship between the landlord and tenant stated that he has become owner of the house by adverse possession. It was stated that the land underneath the house of the respondent was of Jyoti Parsad of Jagadhri and the petitioners have nothing to do with the same. In support of their claim, the landlord has produced Ex.A1 site plan, Ex.A2 conveyance deed i.e. document of purchase of the property and Ex.A3 i.e. extract from the house tax assessment register. The tenant has filed written statement and averred that he is in adverse possession over the house in dispute. The learned Rent Controller allowed the ejectment petition holding that the landlord has proved his ownership on the basis of conveyance deed as validity of the same was not challenged by the respondent in the cross-examination. The Rent Controller was of the opinion that the Municipal record depicts the names of the petitioners as land owners and that of the respondent as occupier. Therefore, their exists relationship between the parties i.e. landlord and tenant. The Rent Controller did not discuss the claim of the adverse possession of the tenant stating therein that such a plea is not to be examined by the Rent Controller but by Civil Court.

(3.) The learned Appellate Authority dismissed the ejectment petition. The reliance of the petitioner on document mark 'A' was found to be not relevant as no details of the rented premises were available to pinpoint the identity of the tenanted premises nor it reveals the name of owner-landlord. It was only shown that the tenancy was created only for two rooms and a veranda at the monthly rent of Rs. 40/-. However, the ejectment petition is in respect of the one room and rent is Rs. 50/-. and thus, it was held that such document mark 'A' does not pertain to premises in dispute. The oral testimony of landlord AW1 and the attesting witness of document Manohar Singh AW2 has been considered. It thus returned a finding that the landlord has failed to prove the relationship between the parties i.e. of landlord and tenant.