(1.) RAM Roop respondent is the landlord of the shop in occupation of Mulkh Raj petitioner as a tenant. The respondent filed an ejectment application against the petitioner on July 20, 1978, for the latter's ejectment on the ground of non-payment of rent at Rs. 600/- per annum and house tax with effect from June 1, 1973. The ejectment was also sought on the ground of personal requirement and the petitioner having impaired the value and utility of the shop.
(2.) THE petitioner tendered Rs. 2050/- by way of rent from 16.7.1975 to 15.12.1978 out of which the respondent accepted Rs. 1850/- for the period 16.7.1975 to 17.7.1978 besides costs and interest as assessed by the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller vide order dated July 29, 1980, accepted the ejectment petition on the ground that the amount of house tax payable by the petitioner had not been tendered on paid. The other two grounds for ejectment of the petitioner were not pressed. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the Rent Controller which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated December 8, 1980. It is against this order that the present revision is directed.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has tendered Rs. 2050/- by way of rent, out of which Rs. 1850/- was accepted by the respondent. The argument proceeds that in case the respondent had accepted the excess amount of Rs. 200/- as well then it could have been adjusted towards the payment of house tax. Under these circumstances, it should be taken that the petitioner had also tendered the amount of tax. Another argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the house tax has been claimed with effect from June 1, 1973. The house tax may have been imposed during the continuation of the tenancy in favour of the petitioner. The respondent could not claim the amount of house tax without issuing a notice in terms of Section 8 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, (hereafter the Act). The respondent has led no evidence whatsoever to prove that such a written notice was sent to the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, could not be evicted from the premises on the ground of non-payment of house tax.