UNION OF INDIA Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition by the Union of India, the petitioner, is directed against the judgment dated 23.8.1979 passed by the learned Appellate Authority under Section 15(4) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short 'the Act'), whereby the appeal of the petitioner against the judgment of the Rent Controller ordering its eviction from the premises in dispute has been dismissed and the order of eviction has been upheld.

(2.) SINCE the year 1932 there is a post office in the premises in dispute and the petitioner has been paying Rs. 25/- per month as rent for the said premises to the landlord-respondents. The relationship of tenant and landlord between the parties is admitted. The respondents sought ejectment of the petitioner by filing an application under Section 13 of the Act on the ground that it had neither paid nor tendered rent along with house-tax for the period from 1.9.1974 to 1.10.1976. On the first date of hearing before the learned Rent Controller the petitioner tendered the arrears of rent at the rat of Rs. 25/- per month amounting of Rs. 650/- along with interest and costs but disputed its liability to pay the amount of house-tax. After discussing the evidence brought on the record, the learned Rent Controller held that the petitioner was liable to pay house-tax amounting to Rs. 42.70 for the period in question and since the same had not been tendered along with the arrears of rent on the first date of hearing, the tender of rent made was held to be invalid and its eviction from the premises was ordered. As already mentioned above, an appeal against the order of ejectment passed by the Rent Controller filed by the petitioner before the learned Appellate Authority failed and this is how the present revision petition by it has been filed in this Court.

(3.) IT is now beyond the pale of any controversy that if the amount of house-tax, where the tenant is liable to pay the same, is not tendered along with the arrears of rent, the tenant renders himself liable to ejectment under Section 13 of the Act. In a case like the present one, the amount of house-tax shall be treated as an integral part of rent because in view of the language of Section 8 ibid such an amount of tax, when demanded by the landlord in accordance with the said provisions shall amount to "increase in rent". The learned counsel for the respondents placed reliance on Gita Devi v. The Financial Commissioner, Haryana, and others, I.L.R. 1983 (2) Punjab and Haryana 511 and Sunder Lal and others v. Mst. Dulari and others (1979) 81 P.L.R. 117, wherein the same view as I have taken was upheld.