IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3243 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:29.05.2009 M/s Rameshwar Dayal Om Parkash and another ...Petitioners versus Satya Prakash and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Kul Bhushan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. ----- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? Yes. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? Yes. K.Kannan, J.(Oral) C.M. No.13494-CII of 2009 Application is allowed as prayed for. Civil Revision No.3243 of 2009 1. The revision is against the order dismissing a plea by the tenant for framing an additional issue regarding the alleged subsisting relationship of landlord and tenant. The Rent Controller rejected it, saying that it has to be proved by the respondent. The subsistence of relationship is the very basis for affording right to a petitioner to apply for eviction and the burden is always on the landlord . The burden of proof never shifts, while the onus of proof would alter depending on the evidence after the initial burden is discharged. The foundational basis of the subsistence of relationship of the landlord and the tenant in a case where the tenant denies such relationship can never Civil Revision No.3243 of 2009 (O&M) - 2- be shifted on the tenant by the only fact that the tenant had taken up the plea. The order of the Court below is erroneous. 2. The additional issue as sought for by the defendant shall be framed as whether there existed a relationship of landlord and tenant between the petitioner and the respondent, and the onus of proof cast on the petitioner. 3. The revision petition is, accordingly, disposed of at the stage of admission dispensing with notice to the respondent, since it is the essentially a Court's duty to frame an appropriate issue for consideration. 4. The Civil Revision is allowed. ( K.KANNAN) JUDGE 29.05.2009 sanjeev