VINOD K.SHARMA, J. - (1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Ludhiana accepting the appeal filed by the tenant against the order of eviction passed by the learned Rent Controller.
(2.) THE respondent-landlord filed an ejectment application Section 13 of the East Punjab Control of Rent and Eviction Act seeking eviction on the ground that one room out of House No. B-III-574 situated in Mohalla Saidan Ludhiana, was rented out to the tenant Ram Parkash at a monthly rent of Rs. 90/- per month besides house tax @ 15%. The eviction was sought on the ground that the tenant has neither paid nor tendered the arrears of rent w.e.f. 1.4.1982; that the, premises in dispute was bona fide required for personal use and occupation. The ground of subletting was also raised.
(3.) THE petition was contested and it was pleaded that the rent petition was barred on the principle of res judicata. It was also claimed that the petition was not maintainable under Order 23 Rule 4 sub-rule 1 C.P.C. The rent was tendered on the first date of hearing. However the liability to pay house tax was denied. The respondent-tenant also denied that the premises was sublet. He also denied that the room was bona fide required by the petitioner-landlord. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed : "1. Whether the tender made by the respondent is invalid ? OPA 2. Whether the respondent is liable to pay house tax ? If so, at what rate and from what effect ? OPP 3. Whether the application is barred by principle of res-judicata as per allegations in para No. 1 of the preliminary objection of the written reply ? OPR 4. Whether the application is barred by Order 23 of the CPC ? OPR 5. Whether the applicant bona fide required the demised premises for his personal use and occupation ? OPA 6. Whether the respondent No. 1 has sublet the demised premises in favour of the respondent No. 2 without written consent of the applicant ? OPA 7. Relief. " ;