CR No. 1593 of 2002 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CR No. 1593 of 2002 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.09.2010 S.K. Kalia ....Petitioner Versus Om Parkash and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. T.N. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.C. Chhabra, Advocate for the respondents. ... Alok Singh, J. Tenant has invoked revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), challenging the judgement dated 17.9.1999 passed by the Rent Controller, Ferozepur as well as the judgement dated 16.1.2002 passed by the Appellate Court, Ferozepur, whereby both the Courts below directed eviction of the tenant - revisionist on the ground that the tenant has failed to pay arrears of rent and is CR No. 1593 of 2002 2 defaulter, and further, on the ground that the tenant has impaired value and utility of the demise premises by making material changes and construction over the demise premises. Brief facts of the present case are that the landlords have filed eviction petition under Section 13 of the Act for eviction of the tenant on two grounds that the tenant is in arrears of rent from 1.9.1991 to 30.11.1993, which he has not paid inspite of repeated requests and the tenant has converted the Barsati (temporary structure) on the roof of the demise premises into a room and has constructed walls in place of bricks Jali on the second floor in the said room. Tenant – revisionist has filed his written statement contending therein that he has been paying rent without any receipt and has paid entire amount of rent and is not in arrears of rent. It is further contended by the tenant that he has not converted the Barsati (temporary structure) into a room by constructing walls and putting door and window on the walls. Tenant in the written statement has further contended that the petitioners and proforma respondents No.2 to 4 are not the landlords of the premises and he has been paying rent only to applicant No.3. The Rent Controller on the pleadings and statements of the parties, has framed Issue No.1 as to whether there exists relationship of landlord - tenant between the applicant and respondent No.1 ? Both the Courts below have recorded the finding that eviction petitioners are the landlords and respondent No.1 in the eviction petition, is the tenant of the landlords and there exists relationship of landlord – tenant between the parties. Both the Courts below have further recorded finding of fact that the tenant could not prove that he ever made payment of rent without any rent CR No. 1593 of 2002 3 receipt being issued by the landlords. Both the Courts below further recorded finding of fact that the tenant has admittedly converted the Barsati (temporary structure) on the roof to keep cots and to dry clothes, into a pucca room by removing cemented jali and raising walls and putting widow and door on the walls, thereby impairing the value and utility of the demise premises. Learned counsel for the tenant - revisionist argued that although, rent was tendered in the Court, but that was found to be short, however, the Rent Controller ought to have granted permission to tender the rent after assessment of provisional rent, which was not done by the Rent Controller, hence, finding of the Courts below that the tenant is in arrears of rent, is liable to be set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that conversion of Barsati (temporary structure) into a pucca room would enhance the value and utility of the demised premises and shall not fall within the definition of impairing the value and utility of the demise premises. Learned counsel for the respondents - landlords vehemently argued that first of all, tenant denied the relationship of landlord - tenant between the parties himself. Tenant, himself took the false stand that he has paid the entire amount of rent without receipt, hence there was no question of assessing the rent and to give an opportunity to the tenant to tender the rent. It is further argued that rent tendered in the Court by the tenant was found to be short, hence, tenant has to blame himself. He further argued that the Barsati (temporary structure) on the roof was made for the purpose of keeping cots and for drying clothes, however, by converting the Barsati (temporary structure) into a pucca room, the tenant has disfigured the CR No. 1593 of 2002 4 tenanted portion and that is why impaired the value and utility of the demise premises. This Court in the matter of Sandeep Shahi Vs. Smt Asha Rani (C.R. No.1595 of 2009, decided on 7.9.2010), after relying upon the judgements rendered by this Court in Raghbir Singh and others Vs. Sansar Chand and others, reported in 2004(3) PLR 841, and in Hukma Devi Vs. Bhagwan Dass, reported in 2003(1) RCR(Rent) 533, held that if relationship of landlord – tenant is denied by the tenant, then the Rent Controller is not supposed to assess the rent and to give an opportunity to the tenant to tender the rent. In view of the above dictum, there was absolutely no occasion for the Rent Controller to assess the rent and to give an opportunity to the tenant to tender the rent. However, from the material available on the record and from the findings recorded by both the Courts below, it is found that the tenant first of all took false plea that he has paid entire amount of rent without any receipt and thereafter, himself denied the relationship of landlord – tenant between the parties and deposited lesser amount in the Court, which makes him defaulter and liable to be evicted. Undisputedly, when the tenant - revisionist started demolishing the cemented Jali forming part of the Barsati (temporary structure) to convert the same into a room, a civil suit seeking injunction was filed by the landlords objecting the activities of the tenant. Both the Courts below have recorded finding that tenant has converted a temporary structure of Barsati into a pucca room. As per the landlords, the Barsati (temporary structure) was made on the roof for the purpose of keeping cots and drying the clothes and by converting it into a room without the consent of the landlords, there CR No. 1593 of 2002 5 would be hardly any place to dry clothes and to keep cots and necessary heavyweight is put on the walls of the structure, which has not only diminished the value of the property, but has also caused danger to the load bearing walls of the construction, which was not made to bear weight of the construction to be raised on the top floor. I find force in the argument of the learned counsel for the landlords. I find no perversity or illegality in the judgements impugned herein. Petition is devoid of merit and hence, is dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 20.09.2010 sk.