PRITPAL SINGH, J. - (1.) THE respondent Dr. Kewal Krishan was tenant of one of the petitioners; namely, Kehar Singh. The latter transferred ownership of the tenancy premises in favour of the petitioners Hardip Singh. Pritam Singh, and Upinder SIngh. Before this transfer Kehar Singh had received an excess amount of Rs. 471.50 towards rent. After the transfer Hardip Singh, Pritam Singh and Upinder Singh petitioners, as the new landlords, filed ejectment petition against the tenant and demanded Rs. 540/- as house-tax paid by them in addition to the arrears of rent. The tenant tendered this amount of house-tax along with the arrears of rent on the first date of hearing before the Rent Controller.
(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY , the tenant - Dr. Kewal Krishan filed a suit against the petitioners to recover the excess amount of rent paid by him as well as Rs. 540/- tendered by him as house-tax in the eviction proceedings. The suit was tried by the Small Causes Court, Ludhiana. The learned trial Court granted a decree of Rs. 471.50 against Kehar Singh petitioner for having received excess rent. The suit in respect of the amount of house-tax of Rs. 540/- tendered by the tenant to the new landlords was dismissed on the ground that the new landlords were entitled to recover the house-tax from the tenant. The decree of Rs. 471.50 Paise granted by the trial Court to the tenant against the previous landlord Kehar Singh petitioner was not appealed against. The tenant - Dr. Kewal Krishan, however, filed an appeal against the dismissal of his suit regarding the recovery of Rs. 540/-. The Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, who heard the appeal, set aside the dismissal order of the trial Court and granted a decree for Rs. 540/- in favour of the tenant against the petitioner holding that the petitioners were not entitled to receive this amount from the tenant. This judgment and decree has been assailed by the petitioners in the present civil revision.
(3.) THE sole point for consideration in this case is whether the petitioners were entitled to recover Rs. 540/-, statedly the amount of house-tax paid by them, from the tenant in the eviction proceedings. The petitioner had claimed this amount in those proceedings as part of rent in view of Section 9 of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). This section reads as under:- "9(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act a landlord shall be entitled to increase the rent of a building or rented land if after the commencement of this Act a fresh create, cess or tax is levied in respect of the building or rented land by any local authority or if there is an increase in the amount of such a rate, cess or tax being levied at the commencement of the Act: Provided that the increase in rent shall not exceed the amount of any such rate, cess or tax or the amount of the increase in such rate, cess or tax, as the case may be. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force or any contract no landlord shall recover from his tenant the amount of any tax or any portion thereof in respect of any building or rented land occupied by such tenant by any increase in the amount of the rent payable or otherwise, save as provided in sub-section (1)." ;