stated that he was issuing receipts to the tenants and prior thereto his father was also issuing receipts and contention is that as the counter receipt of payment of rent has not come on record adverse inference can be drawn that Defendant was paying rent however receipts are not issued by Malpani. The burden was upon the Defendant to prove that she is tenant of the suit property. It is difficult to accept that despite long standing possession of 17 years, there is not a single rent receipt in her name. The erstwhile owner had deposed that he was issuing rent receipts to other tenant. In face of such deposition, the Defendant ought to have called upon the erstwhile owner to produce rent receipt issued to other tenants, in absence of which adverse inference could be drawn. No evidence has been pointed out to show that the erstwhile owner was called upon to produce the rent receipts. As such, the oral evidence of the owner/landlord that he was issuing rent receipt to bona fide tenant remained unchallenged. In any event, the drawing of adverse inference against the erstwhile landlord for non production of the rent receipts issued to the other tenants is not sufficient to prove the tenancy of the Defendant especially when it is not claimed that subsequent to the Plaintiffs having purchased the property there was attornment of tenancy. The evidence produced by the Defendant shows her long standing possession, however Defendant has failed to show that the possession of
