CHANAN MAL Vs. SHIV SHANKAR TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Chanan Mal was inducted as a tenant in a shop and two rooms owned by the Shiv Shankar Trust, Jagadhri, respondent. The landlord-respondent filed an application on 19.10.1977 under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter called the 'Act') seeking ejectment of the petitioner on the ground that he had failed to pay the rent from 1.10.1974 to 30.9.1977 as also the house tax on the property in question the rent being determined at the rate of Rs. 40/- per month. The petitioner upon being served with the notice, filed his written statement and pleaded that the rent was in fact at the rate of Rs. 20/- per month all inclusive and no further amount was due by way of house tax etc. He also took the plea that he had fallen seriously ill and had remained admitted in the hospital for sometime and on 4.8.1977, the members of the trust had taken forcible possession of the premises but on the intervention of the neighbours, the petitioner's wife had been re-inducted into the house in question on paying the rent upto 30.10.1977. The petitioner further admitted that the rent from 1.11.1977 was due against him and he was willing to defray all arrears.

(2.) THE following issues were framed on the pleadings of the parties :

(3.) MR . I.K. Mehta, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has argued that there was admittedly no written lease deed between the parties and that the petitioner had in his written statement clearly pleaded that the rate of rent was Rs. 20/- per month and that the respondent used to accept the rent and make an entry in the account books without issuing a receipt and this averment had not been controverted by the respondent in his replication. He has also pleaded that the petitioner's contention with regard to the rate of rent also found support from the house tax assessment of the Municipal Committee for the year 1974, wherein the rate of rent was shown as Rs. 20/- per month. He has also pointed out that from the additional evidence adduced, the assessment for the year 1971-1978 had also been made by the Municipal Committee on the rent at the rate of Rs. 20/- per month. He has accordingly relied on Smt. Sant Kaur v. Balwant Singh, 1983(2) RCR (Rent) 427 : 1983(2) RLR 520, Kewal Krishan v. Bhagwanti, 1993 HRR 176 : 1992(1) RCR 556 (P&H) and Sher Singh v. Anil Kumar, 1991 HRR 336, and has urged that the house tax assessment was evidence of great value more particularly in a case where there was no written lease deed and the oral evidence adduced by them was widely disparate on material particulars. He has also submitted that the onus to prove the quantum of rent lay on the landlord and the finding of the Appellate Authority to the contrary on that score was incorrect. He has finally pleaded that as per the provisions of Section 19 of the Indian Trust Act, 1882, it was mandatory upon the trust to maintain proper books of account and in case they did not do so, an inference was to be drawn against the trust. In this connection, it has also been pointed out that the petitioner had moved an application under Order 11 Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 31.8.1979 before the Rent Controller, calling upon the respondent to produce their books of accounts but though the notice of the application had been given to the landlord and time also granted for that purpose, the respondent had not produced the account books and had taken the plea that no account books were being maintained.