SHADI LAL SHARMA Vs. MOOL CHAND AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment passed by learned Appellate Authority, Chamba Division, Chamba, in Rent Appeal No. 4 of 2010, dated 01.10.2010, vide which, learned Appellate Authority has upheld the Order passed by learned Rent Controller, Dalhousie, in Rent Petition No. 1 of 2007, dated 30.04.2010, whereby learned Rent Controller had partly allowed the rent petition of the landlord as far as the arrears of rent was concerned but rejected the claim of the petitioner therein regarding impairment of value and utility.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present case are that the petitioner herein i.e. the landlord filed petition for eviction of respondent from the shop i.e. premises shop subject matter of the petitioner before learned Rent Controller, Dalhousie, on the ground that the respondent was in arrears of rent w.e.f. March, 2003 and also on the ground that the respondent without the consent of the petitioner had covered open verandah by removing wooden planks and ?Kaddies? and also by removing wooden stairs and poles, had put lintel over it. As per the petitioner, the respondent had removed wooden door and extended the shop including the space of verandah in the shop and put an iron shutter in front of the said shop and also removed the side walls and raised concrete pillars by removing wooden planks from the side of the shop and raised bricks wall and as such, he had changed the entire front, which acts had impaired materially the value and utility of the building.

(3.) In reply, the respondent though admitted the relationship between the parties of landlord and tenant but besides disputing dimension of the shop as were claimed by the petitioner he challenged the rate of rent and stated that the shop in question has been rented out at the rate of Rs.166/- per month and not at the rate of Rs.800/- per month, as was claimed by the petitioner. The factum of respondent being in arrears of rent was also disputed and according to the respondent, rent for the year 2002 amounting to Rs.2000/- was personally received by the petitioner by way of a valid receipt and rent for the year 2003 was also received by him personally on 03.04.2005 though no receipt was issued in lieu of the same. Rent for the year 2004-05 amounting to Rs.4000/- was also sent by him to the landlord by way of Demand Draft No. 136432 dated 14.08.2006 drawn upon P.N.B. Bakloh Cantt vide registered letter on 14.08.2006. The tenant also expressed his readiness to pay the rent w.e.f. 01.01.2004 onwards at the rate of Rs.166/- per month. The tenant also disputed the allegation of having impaired materially the value and utility of the building by way of effecting changes as were alleged by the landlord. Though he admitted having carried out minor repairs but according to him, the same were carried out about 10-15 years back and that too with the permission of the landlord. As per the tenant, the shutter was affixed with the verbal consent of the landlord about 4 years back to safeguard the stock kept in the shop and according to the tenant, it had rather increased the value of the structure. Accordingly, on the basis of the said submissions, the tenant stated that there was no merit in the petition and the same be dismissed.