LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-823

KARAMJIT SINGH Vs. KAMAL JAIN AND ORS.

Decided On May 12, 2015
KARAMJIT SINGH Appellant
V/S
Kamal Jain And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is preferred by the petitioner-tenant against the order dated 8.1.2011 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Malerkotla vide which ejectment petition filed under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the eviction of the petitioner-tenant and others from the demised premises was accepted and judgment dated 11.4.2014 of learned Appellate Authority, Sangrur vide which the appeal filed against the above said order dated 8.1.2011 passed by the learned Rent Controller was dismissed.

(2.) The case of the respondent No. 1 herein (landlord) before the Rent Controller in brief was that initially the premises in dispute was owned by one Kawaljit Singh son of Darshan Singh. He rented out the same to one Kanwaljit Singh vide a rent note dated 12.2.1999 on rent @ Rs. 600.00 per month besides the house tax and electricity charges. The respondent No. 1 herein-landlord purchased this property vide sale deed dated 1.7.2003 and at that time it was under the tenancy of different tenants. She asked the petitioner herein(tenant) to pay the rent w.e.f. 1.7.2003 @ Rs. 750.00 per month which she did not pay. Hence the instant petition.

(3.) Upon notice, respondents appeared and filed reply taking the plea that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and that they did not take the demised premises on rent from any Kamaljit Singh nor executed any rent note in his favour. The alleged rent note dated 12.2.1999 was stated to be forged and fictitious document. Their further plea was that they took the demised premises on rent from one Darshan Singh @ Rs. 250.00 per month about five years back, who did not issue any receipt regarding the receipt of rent. Since Kamaljit Singh was not the owner of the property in dispute so as such he was not competent to execute the sale deed qua the same in favour of applicant(herein respondent No. 1-landlord). On the basis of pleadings of the parties, issues were framed.