CWP No.8932 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.8932 of 2008 Decided on : 22-07-2010 M/s Elofic Industries (India) ....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr.D.S.Patwalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Goyal, AAG, Haryana Mr.M.K.Sood, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 and 3 Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent no.5 MAHESH GROVER, J Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that they are governed by the lease deed which is on record as Annexure P-1. Clause 11 thereof reads as follows:- “11. that, the lessee shall abide by all the bye-laws, rules and regulations of various Govt. and Semi-Government Authorities. If any Property Tax, House Tax and other taxes are enhanced by the Authorities concerned, the same shall be to the account of the Lessee only. However, the Present rate of tax will be paid by the Lessor.” They are agreed that according to this clause, the petitioner was required to pay only the enhanced house tax but was not liable to pay house tax at the rate which was existing when the lease deed was executed CWP No.8932 of 2008 2 in the year 1978. The counsel for the respondent states that he has no objection if the share which was to be deposited by the respondent no.5 is withdrawn by the petitioner in terms of this clause and that since 1994 the petitioner be made liable to pay the enhanced house tax. In view of the consensual approach of the parties and for the reason that this is the only limited prayer made in the petition, I deem it appropriate to accept the contention raised before this Court and dispose of the writ petition with a direction that petitioner shall be at liberty to withdraw the house tax deposited at the original rate and which was paid by the respondent and against which the petitioner had also deposited the tax, but from 1994 onwards it is the petitioner who shall satisfy the payment for house tax although the remaining amount of tax which equates with the rate of house tax existing prior to 1994 shall be paid by the petitioner. This shall be subject to the rights of the parties in the petition pending before the Rent Controller. In these circumstances, Annexure P-8 is quashed. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. July 22, 2010 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge