J.V.Gupta, J. - (1.) THE tenant Petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order of the Appellate Authority, dated 29th November, 1979, whereby the order of the Kent Controller, directing his ejectment, has been maintained.
(2.) THE premises in dispute consists of two sheds measuring 75'x56.' situate within boundary will on Jhajjar Road, Bahadurgarh (Rohtak). These premises were rented out on a monthly rent of Rs. 950/ -. It has been claimed in the ejectment application that under the provision of Haryana Urban (Control of Kent and Eviction) Act, 1973. (hereinafter referred to as the Act; the rent of the demised premises was liable to be increased from Rs. 950/ -to Rs 1142/ - per month. The landlord gave notice to he tenant to pay rent at the enhanced rate of Rs. 1142/ - per month with effect from 26th June, 1974 but he defaulted in making the payment of rent date from him since 1st May, 1974, and as such he was liable to ejectment from the demised premises on the ground of non -payment of rent. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenant on 9th December, 1977 he resisted the application by dentIng that the landlord was entitled to claim enhanced rent at the rate mentioned In the ejectment application under the provisions of the Act The service of any notice on him to claim the arrears of rent was also denied by him. It was further pleaded that he had already paid the rent to the landlord upto March, 1975 as per Annexure I to IV through cheques and he had tendered the arrears of rent together with costs and Interest as assessed by the Rent Controller on 5th December, 1973, and as such the sole ground of his ejectment from the demised premises was no longer avail - able to him.
(3.) IN the application, the landlord denied that the tenant bad paid any rent to him for the period May, 1974 to March, 1975. He claimed that the rent was due to him from the Respondent with effect from 1st May, 1974 to 30th November, 1977, at Rs. 1142/ -per month. In the alternative, he claimed that the rent to the extent of Rs. 56110/ - we due to him from the tenant at Rs. 950/ per month for the period 1st May 1974 to 30th June, 1977, and the tenant having clearly defaulted in making the payment of the rent due to him, was liable to ejectment. On the pleadings of the parties, the Rent Controller framed the following issues: - 1. Whether the written statement is signed and verified by a competent person ? 2. Whether the Respondent has made payments as per his written statement, if so, to what effect 7 3. To what amount is the Petitioner entitled to ? On issue No. 1, the Rent Controller held that the written statement filed by the tenant was verified and signed by a competent person. On issue Nos. 3 and 3, the Rent Controller, cams to the conclusion that "in the light of above discussion, I find that including the rent tendered in the Court, the Respondent had paid a sum of Rs. 5855.86 towards the rent which was due for the period 1.5.75 onwards Actually a sum of Rs. 24,700/ - was due from the Respondent for this period. The Respondent has not paid the balance amount of Rs. 18,844,16. As such the Respondent is liable to be evicted on the ground of non payment of rent to the applicant". Consequently the learned Rent Cont - roller accepted the ejectment application and directed the ejectment of the tenant.;