HANS RAJ Vs. PREM CHAND BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revisions are directed against order dtd. 4/5/2018 passed by Appellate Authority under The Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 whereby eviction has been ordered from shop as detailed out in the headnote of the eviction petition (hereinafter referred to as the demises premises).

(2.) Landlord filed eviction petition under Sec. 13 of the 1973 Act claiming that the demised premises was let out by him and his brother Jagan Nath to respondent No.1 vide rent note dtd. 1/12/1997 at a monthly rent of Rs.7,000.00. As per terms and conditions of the rent note, respondent No.1 was under obligation to enhance monthly rent by 20% on expiry of every 03 years. At enhanced rent, the monthly rent payable at the time of filing of the eviction petition was Rs.12016..00 Tenant was in arrears of rent since 1/4/2004. The second ground pleaded seeking eviction was that respondent No.1 had subletted shop in question to respondent No.2 without written consent and approval of the petitioner. Respondent No.2 was in exclusive possession of the shop in question and was independently running business under the name and style of M/s. Suhag Churi Bhandar. Respondent No.1 was charging rent of demised premises from respondent No.2 and has thus parted possession of the demised premises for consideration.

(3.) Both the respondents contested the petition and filed separate written statements. Respondent No.1 averred that he has no concern with the demised premises. He was never tenant in the said shop. It was further pleaded that respondent No.1 has taken another shop having ground floor as well as first floor where he is running his shop by the name of Super Store since 9/12/2017 at a rent of Rs.7,000.00 per month.