IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6817 of 2008 Date of decision: 7th July, 2010 Gopal Krishan … Petitioner Versus Satya Devi … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Ashok Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suresh Goyal, Advocate for the respondent. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) A concurrent finding has been given by both the Courts below that the rate of rent payable by the petitioner-tenant was Rs.35,000/- per annum and the counter-claim raised by the petitioner that the rate of annual rent was Rs.9000/- was rejected. Counsel for the petitioner contends that a grave error has been committed by both the Courts below by relying upon the rent note Ex.A-1 dated 11th January, 1994, where the rate of rent was noticed as Rs.35,000/-. Learned counsel submits that this ought not to be done by both the Courts below, as on that date the petitioner-tenant was a minor and no contract could bind him adverse to his interest. Learned counsel further submits that the rent note was not registered, therefore, the same cannot be read regarding the rate of rent. Both the Courts below considered these submissions, but came to the conclusion that in pursuance of the rent note Ex.A-1, the Civil Revision No.6817 of 2008 petitioner-tenant has paid an advance for a period of three months, i.e. from 1st January, 1994 to 31st March, 1994, amounting to Rs.8,750/-. Therefore, the conduct of the petitioner-tenant to pay this rent at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per annum was considered as a clinching circumstance. Thus, no interference is warranted to disturb the well reasoned findings given by both the Courts below. Dismissed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE July 7, 2010 rps 2