VIJAY KUMAR Vs. MAHESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed by the petitioner-landlord under Section 15(6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for brevity the Act) challenges order dated 3-1-2003 passed by the Rent Controller, Hansi holding that the document dated 12-9-1997 since requires registration cannot be exhibited by sustaining an objection raised by the tenant-respondent.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the demised shop was allegedly rented out to the tenant-respondent vide document dated 12-9-1997 @ Rs. 2200/- p.m. as rent. The petitioner-landlord filed ejectment petition being case No. 20/2 on 17-3-1998 against the tenant-respondent on various grounds including the ground of non-payment of rent. After notice, tenant-respondent had appeared and issues were framed. When the petitioner-landlord sought to exhibit the document dated 12-9-1997, the tenant-respondent raised an objection that the document is a lease deed and it cannot be exhibited because it requires registration under Section 17(l)(d) of the Registration Act, 1908 (for brevity the Registration Act). The operative part of the order of the Rent Controller reads as under :-

(3.) Shri Parveen Hans, learned counsel for the landlord-petitioner has argued that the document dated 12-9-1 997 is necessarily a rent note executed between the parties and that there is a specific admission in this regard in the written statement filed by the tenant-respondent. According to the learned counsel a perusal of the written statement shows that the demised shop was on rent earlier to the execution of the document dated 12-9-1997 at a far less rate but the rate of rent was increased by executing the rent deed dated 12-9-1997. The rent was increased to Rs. 1955/- plus Rs. 245/- as house-tax which is to be taken as fair rent. The learned counsel has also argued that for the sake of arguments if it is admitted that the document dated 12-9-1997 is a lease deed and is compulsorily registrable,' then it could still be used for a collateral purpose under Section 49 of the Registration Act to show the nature of possession. The learned counsel has maintained that the document would still be a relevant piece of evidence.