Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raj Kumar Arora vs Gian Kaur on 10 January, 2013
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
CR 137/2013 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR 137/2013
Date of decision:10/01/2013
Raj Kumar Arora
.............Petitioner
v.
Gian Kaur
.............Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:- Mr.Rajinder Goyal,Advocate for the petitioner
Jaswant Singh,J(Oral).
The tenant is in revision under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act,1949 (for short the EPURR Act) aggrieved against the order dated 8.12.2012 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh whereby the assessment of provisional rent has been made and the petitioner/tenant has been directed to pay the arrears of rent w.e.f. 30.11.2012 @ Rs.2000/- p.m., alongwith 6% interest and costs, in the pending eviction proceedings filed by the respondent/landlady under Section 13 of the EPURR Act.
The sole grievance of the petitioner/tenant is regarding the period for which the arrears of rent is being claimed.
It is submitted that rent had been paid upto October 2011 and since November 2011 the landlady had refused to accept the rent. For payment of rent till October 2011 reliance is being placed on a complaint dated 12.12.2011 (P1)made by the landlady to the SSP, CR 137/2013 2 Chandigarh wherein it has been stated that the tenant is not paying the rent "for the last many months on the prevailing rent rates".
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner I find that his argument, to the effect that the rent stood paid till October 2011 in the light of the aforesaid words stated in the complaint made by the landlady, is totally devoid of any merit and hence liable to be dismissed. The relationship between the parties that of landlady and tenant and rate of rent i.e. Rs.2000/- per month is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that at the stage of assessment of provisional rent, the landlady has to establish the relationship and it is for the tenant to show that the rent has been paid for the periods claimed by the landlady to be in arrears of rent.
In the present case besides the reliance on the words in the complaint there is no documentary proof or receipt produced by the tenant/petitioner to prove that he has paid rent uptil October 2011. In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh has rightly ignored the reliance on the words in the complaint since they even otherwise relate to prevailing rent rates and not the admitted rent between the parties.
In view of the above, I find no illegality or perversity in the impugned order so as to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction.
Dismissed.
10.01.2013. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge