STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. SHIV DAYAL PUROHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the State / PWD Department being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25.01.2003 in a money recovery suit No.132/2000 � Shiv Dayal s/o Shanker Lal Purohit vs. State of Rajasthan through Collector, Bhilwara and another filed by the plaintiff � landlord Shiv Dayal Purohit, by which the learned trial court of District Judge, Bhilwara has decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff to the extent of Rs.2,54,000/- along with 6% interest of Rs.2,28,500/-.

(2.) THE matter pertains to arrears of recovery of rent in respect of a building of the plaintiff � landlord given on rent to PWD Department for office of the Executive Engineer of the PWD Department in Bhilwara on 01.10.1989 at the rent of Rs.3,950/- per month.

(3.) THIS Court is of the view that the objection raised by the learned counsel for the defendant � appellant, PWD Department, appears to be correct that the said Document C-12/17 � the letter dated 04.10.1999 does not appear to be exhibited on record and proved in accordance with law before the learned trial court, but there is a series of documents by way of correspondence between the two authorities of Department; which have been placed on record before the trial court and, therefore, it appears that the valuation report, as such, is not the sole evidence, which could be relied upon, in the absence of any contrary or specified agreement adopting such report as the basis for decreeing the arrears of rent on the basis of said Valuation Report Ex. 12 alone. The tenancy is an agreement between the two parties and unless the rent is specifically agreed, the same could not have been increased on the basis of the valuation report alone, which was at best an evidence in support of the plaintiff's case. In the absence of any proper rebuttal by the defendant / Department, the suit has been decreed to the extent of arrears of rent treating the said amount of Rs.11,802/- as monthly payable rent. The matter is, therefore, required to be remanded back to the learned trial court.