KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. - (1.) The present revision petition has been filed by the legal representatives of tenant Jai Karan on the ground that they had inherited the tenancy.
(2.) IN the present case, eviction petition was preferred by Prithvi Singh Sharma. The eviction petition was instituted on 4.8.1987. It was stated in the rent petition that petitioners herein are the sons of Jai Karan who had expired in the month of January 1987 and now they are tenant in the demised premises at a monthly rent of Rs. 180/- per month including house tax and electric charges. It was further stated that the house is in question was let out to the deceased Jai Karan for his residence and no fair rent of tenancy has been fixed. In para 5 of the eviction petition, it was stated that tenant is liable to be evicted on the ground that he has failed to make payment of arrears of rent including house tax and electric charges from July 1984. Second ground pleaded was that the respondents had changed the user and occupation of the house in question to that of commercial without the consent and knowledge of the petitioner. Thirdly that the respondent/tenant was a Band Master and he used to play drums, bands and flute in loud manner, therefore, the same caused nuisance to the inhabitants of the vicinity. It was further stated that the premises is required for personal necessity as son of the landlord who was previously in the foreign country has come back to India in the month of January 1987. it was stated that the petitioner was having small portion of house in his own possession. He is having one room and two stores on the ground floor, which is not sufficient for him, as his son and his family, had just returned from foreign country. Notice of the petition was issued to the legal representatives of Jai Karan. They appeared and filed the written statement, took a preliminary objection that they are not residing in the demised premises as the same is not a residential house but a shop. It was further stated that the petition is bad for non-joinder of the necessary parties and the particulars as required by law have not been furnished. On merits, it was stated that they were tenant of a shop and not of a residential house. Rate of rent was also disputed. It was stated that it was not Rs. 180/- per month but Rs. 100/- per month. It was stated that the rent had been paid but no receipts were issued. Change of user and occupation was also denied. It was admitted that the petitioners are Band Masters and are running their business under the name and style of M/s Saraswati Band, Gurgaon. They keep their instruments and uniform of the workers in the shop in dispute. Therefore, the ground of nuisance was also denied. It was stated that the landlord and his son were having sufficient accommodation, therefore, ground of personal necessity is not made out. Learned Rent Controller framed the following issues :- 1. Whether the respondents are tenants over the disputed house on a monthly rent of Rs. 180/- including house tax and electric charges ? OPP 2. Whether the respondents are in arrears of rent from July, 1984 till filing of the petition, if so to what effect ? OPP 3. Whether the respondents have changed the user and occupation of the house in question from residential to commercial ? If so, to what effect ? OPP 3A. Whether the respondents No. 4 and 5 are liable to be ejected from the rented premises on the grounds mentioned in the petition ? OPP
(3.) WHETHER the respondents have caused a permanent nuisance to the petitioner as well as the inhabitants as alleged. If so to what effect ? OPR;