AMAR CHAND Vs. KISHAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TENANT -petitioner has filed this revision petitioner against Rent Controller's order dated January 18, 1993, and the Appellate Authority's order dated August 5, 1985, whereby landlord's rent petition was allowed and his appeal was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Kishan Chand is Secretary and Shiv Narain is president of Khandan Tannu Mall, Jagraon. This Khandan Tannu Mall is the owner of the shop situate in Agwar Landhai Adda Raikot Jagraon. The petitioner is a tenant therein at a monthly rent of Rs. 10/ -. The landlords contention is that the tenant-petitioner has not paid rent since January 12, 1970, and the demised premises when it was leased out was wooden khokha and platform measuring 20' x 20', but the tenant has dismantled these wooden Khokhas and has constructed Pucca shops in its place without permission of the landlords and thus has caused material impairment to the tenement. On these counts, the landlords claimed petitioner's ejectment.

(3.) THE Rent Controller recorded the evidence of the parties and arrived at a finding that the petitioners being Secretary and President of Khandan Tannu Mall, Jagraon, are competent to file this rent petition as by a resolution Exhibit A-2 they have been authorised to file this petition. The property is owned by Khandan Tannu Mall, Jagraon and being its Secretary and President they are authorised to file this petition. The Rent Controller also held that the tenant has admitted on oath, that he has not paid rent since 1970, though in the Court he deposited rent only from October 1991 to March 1992. Thus, he is defaulter in payment of arrears of rent. The tenant also admitted on oath that he was inducted in the demised premises on January 12, 1963, under a written rent note, which was also produced before the Rent Controller. He also admitted that he constructed two Pucca shops thereon in the year 1961 after taking permission from the then landlord Jagan Nath son of Waliati Ram, whom he did not examine. Thus, the Rent Controller found that he has constructed these shops in place of wooden cabins without obtaining the permission of the landlord, because the premises was leased out to him on January 12, 1963, and not in 1961, as the tenant has stated. Thus, on both the counts the petition was allowed and ejectment order was passed.