BHAIYA RAM Vs. MAHAVIR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a tenant's petition under Sec. 10 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order of the Appellate Authority confirming on appeal the order of the Rent Controller evicting him from the premises in dispute.

(2.) One Nand Ram was the owner of the house in dispute which is situate on Jhajjar Road in Rohtak. He had given it on a monthly rent of Rs. 8/ - to Bhaiya Ram. On 11th of June, 1965. he entered into an agreement of sale of this house with Bhaiya Ram for Rs. 2,000/ -. Rs. 100/ - was taken by him as earnest money and it was stipulated that the sale deed would be executed and registered within two months on the receipt of the balance of Rs. 1,900/ -. If Bhaiya Ram did not pay the balance of the purchase money within the period fixed, then Nand Ram was authorised to forfeit the amount of the earnest money. If, on the other hand, Nand Ram did not get the deed executed and registered on the payment of Rs. 1.9000/ - by Bhaiya Ram, then the latter would be entitled to get back Rs. 100/ - paid by him as earnest money and Rs. l0()/ - more by way of penalty. It was further mentioned in the agreement that it was the responsibility of Nand Ram to satisfy Bhaiya Ram about his title to the house in question by showing him necessary papers. Instead of executing the sale deed in favour of Bhaiya Ram, Nand Ram, however, sold the house in dispute by a registered deed on 21st of July, 1965, to Mahavir Prasad for Rs. 2,500/. After having purchased this house, Mahavir Prasad, on 26th of July, 1965, sent a notice to Bhaiya Ram to pay the arrear of rent and vacate the house within one week and hand over its possession to him. as it was needed by him for his personal accommodation. On 3rd of August, 1965, Bhaiya Ram issued a notice to Nand Ram calling upon him to execute the sale deed regarding the house in his favour, as he was willing to pay the balance of the purchase money. Since Bhaiya Ram did not vacate the house Mahavir Prasad, on 27th of August, 1965, filed an application under Sec. 13 of the Act for ejectment against him before the Rent Controller on two grounds, viz. non payment of rent and requirement of the premises for his own personal occupation.

(3.) Bhaiya Ram, on his appearance in Court, paid the arrears of rent together with interest and costs, but contested the ejectment application alleging that before the house was sold to Mahavir Prasad by Nand Ram, the latter had entered into an agreement with him for the sale of that very house, on 11th June, 1935, as mentioned above. After the execution of the agreement, he was in possession of the house not as a tenant of Nand Ram, but in part performance of that agreement under Sec. 53 -A of the Transfer of Property Act, about which fact Mahavir Prasad had full knowledge. It was also pleaded by him that Mahavir Prasad had no personal need of the premises in dispute.