RAJINDER PARKASH Vs. DIAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present judgment shall dispose of two civil revision petitions i.e. C.R. Nos. 2443 and 2444 of 2012 as common questions of facts and law are involved in both the revision petitions. Facts are being taken from C.R. No. 2443 of 2012, Rajinder Parkash vs. Dial Singh. The present revision petition filed by the landlord is against the order dated 30.11.2010 passed by the Rent Controller, Amloh, who dismissed the eviction petition filed under Section 13 of The East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short 'the Act'). Challenge has also been laid to the order of the Appellate authority dated 24.01.2012 who, partly allowed the appeal and passed a conditional order of ejectment by providing that the tenant would deposit the amount of house tax amounting to Rs. 1,773/-, costs of Rs. 100/- alongwith Rs. 2,000/- as interest for the period 1995 till 2012.

(2.) A perusal of the paper book would go on to show that the eviction petition was filed under Section 13 of the Act on the strength of the averments that Brij Lal, father of the petitioner was owner of the residential building including the property in dispute which is a shop and part of the building. The respondent had taken the shop on rent from his father vide rent note dated 24.06.1988 and the rent settled was at Rs. 350/- per month. Arrears had been paid till February, 1996 to Brij Lal, who had expired and had executed a registered Will in favour of the applicant on 17/18.01.1995.

(3.) The tenant had paid rent to the petitioner under receipt admitting him to be landlord and owner but from June, 1997 till filing of the petition on 19.05.1998, he had not paid the house tax amounting to Rs. 1,773/- being 15% of the rental value.