JAGAN NATH Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The building in dispute forms part of house No. W. D. 156, situated in Jullundur City which admittedly belonged to one Mohd. Ahmed who became an evacuee. The house was purchased through a sale certificate dated the 7th of July, 1964 (Exhibit A/2) by the petitioner from the Custodian of Evacuee Property (hereinafter called the Custodian). Claiming that she inducted the respondent as a tenant into the building in dispute, the petitioner made an application, under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act praying for his eviction on the ground that he has fallen into arrears with regard to the payment of rent which was due at a rate of Rs. 40/- per mensem since the Ist of March, 1968. The application was controverted by the respondent with the sole plea that no relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the petitioner and himself. The Controller found that although the petitioner had become the owner of house No. W. D. 156 by purchase from the Custodian, there was no acceptable evidence of the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant between her and the respondent. The petitioner's application was, therefore, dismissed.

(2.) The contents of the assessment register (Exhibit P. 1) maintained by the Municipal Committee, Jullundur for the period 1965 to 1970 deserve careful scrutiny. The relevant column is 5 which is headed "Name of the person in possession with his parentage, caste and place of residence, if he is a person different from the owner.". In this column appears the following entry :-

(3.) I have not discussed the oral evidence led by the petitioner in support of her case and there is a good reason for it. Both the courts below have held that this evidence is unreliable and after going through it I see no reason to come to a contrary finding.