ABDUL RASHID Vs. MOHMAD RAMJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition is directed against the order passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh and that of the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh dated 20.9.1990 and 22.10.1990 respectively. By virtue of the impugned orders, the authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (for short 'the Act') passed an order of eviction against the petitioner which was confirmed by the Appellate Authority.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that respondent-landlord filed a petition for eviction against the petitioner with respect to the premises i.e. House No. 1242/1, Mani Majra, Union Territory, Chandigarh. It was alleged that petitioner is a tenant in three rooms at a monthly rent of Rs. 200/- besides electricity charges. The petitioner was stated to have not paid the arrears of rent from 1.7.1985 to 31.8.1987. The petition for eviction was contested and in the reply filed it was stated that petitioner is a tenant in two rooms and a verandah at a monthly rent of Rs. 100/-. The arrears have been paid uptil September, 1987 in presence of Abdul Saleem and Kalwa but no rent receipt has been issued. Needless to say that the learned Rent Controller had assessed the costs and counsel fee but no tender was made by the petitioner.

(3.) THE petitioner had preferred an appeal with the learned Appellate Authority. Seemingly there was no controversy about the findings of the learned Rent Controller regarding the agreed rate of rent. However, with respect to the contention that arrears had been paid uptil September, 1987 the learned Appellate Authority confirmed the findings of the learned Rent Controller and held that the petitioner-tenants had taken a definite stand that rent had been paid in presence of Abdul Saleem and Kalwa. Abdul Saleem had not been examined while Kalwa did not support the claim of the tenant- petitioners. The appellate authority accordingly held that arrears of rent were due and the appeal was dismissed.