HARJINDER SINGH Vs. VED PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 15 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, (hereinafter to be referred as "the Rent Act"), Harjinder Singh petitioner- tenant (hereafter to be referred as "the tenant") has directed the present revision petition against the impugned order dated 02.11.2006, vide which the Appellate Authority has set aside the order of Rent Controller and accepted the eviction petition of Ved Parkash respondent-landlord (hereinafter to be referred as "the landlord") and he (tenant) was ordered to be ejected from the demised premises (booth).

(2.) THE matrix of the facts culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal, of present petition and emanating from the record, is that originally, the landlord filed a petition under section 13 of the Rent Act for eviction of the tenant, inter-alia, pleading that the tenant took the demised premises for 11 months at a monthly rent of Rs. 1100/- with effect from 28.7.1992, vide rent note of even date with clear stipulation that 10% of the rent was to be increased after expiry of every 11 months. According to the landlord, the tenant did not pay the rent with effect from 28.07.1998 till the filing of the petition and, thus, he is in arrears of rent of Rs. 45,984/-.

(3.) THE tenant contested the ejectment petition and filed the written statement, inter alia, pleading certain preliminary objections of maintainability of the petition, being false and frivolous, not properly verified and the objection of jurisdiction of the Rent Controller to try and adjudicate the matter in dispute, as the land had already been acquired by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter to be referred as "the HUDA"). The landlord ceases to be owner of demised premises after its acquisition and he cannot resort to the ejectment proceedings under the Rent Act.