R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) THIS Civil Revision has been filed by Shri Kishori Lal against Shri Hari Chand and it has been directed against the order dated 28.10.1982 passed by the Appellate Authority under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 vide which the appeal of respondent Shri Hari Chand was allowed by setting aside the order of the Rent Controller dated 15.9.80 and the application under Section 13 of the said Act was allowed and an order of eviction of the petitioner from the rented premises shown in red in the plan Ex.A.1 on the ground of non-payment of rent was passed and tenant was allowed a period of one month to vacate the demised premises.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that S/Shri Munshi Ram and Hari Chand claimed themselves to be the landlords and owners of the portion of the property shown by the letters ABCD and in red colour in site plan Ex.A.1. According to them, they constructed the said premises in the year 1967 after obtaining the permission from the Municipal Committee, Narwana on 7.9.67. The premises was let out to the tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 50/-. It was further pleaded by the landlords that one shop adjoining to the rented premises, was already in the possession of the respondent, now petitioner, in the capacity of a tenant and tenant was paying rent at the rate of Rs. 70/- per month for that shop which was constructed in the year 1957-58. Now the landlords claimed eviction of the demised premises on the ground of non- payment of rent with effect from 1.3.1974. The notice of the rent petition was given to the Kishori Lal tenant who alleged that he took the shop consisting of three portions on rent at the rate of Rs. 70/- per month in the year 1960. The premises in dispute is a part of the tenancy of those premises which were taken into rent at the rate of Rs. 70/- per month. No independent tenancy was created between the landlords and him and in these circumstance, the question of non-payment of rent of the rented premises does not arise. It was also pleaded by the tenant that the landlord earlier filed a suit for eviction against him and the same was also dismissed. The appeal was also dismissed as withdrawn. Therefore, the present application for eviction is barred by the principle of res judicata. From the pleadings of the parties, the learned Rent Controller framed the following issues :- 1. Whether the building in dispute was rented out by the petitioner to the respondent at the monthly rent of Rs. 50/- as alleged ? 2. Whether the respondent is liable to be ejected on the ground of non-payment of rent ? 3. Whether the petition is barred by the principle of res-judicata ? 4. Whether the building in dispute is a part of a shop which is on rent with the respondent on rent of Rs. 70/- per month, as if so, its effect ? 5. Relief.
(3.) THE parties led evidence in support of their case and vide order dated 15.9.1980 the learned Rent Controller, dismissed the ejectment application under Section 13 of the Act.;