The High Court dismissed the revision petition allowing the Appellate Court's judgment. It held that since the tenancy was oral, the Rent Controller could not introduce a 10 percent annual rent increase without written evidence.
The revision petition was dismissed; the judgment of the lower Appellate Court was upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.1391 of 2004 Date of decision: 26th November, 2008
Smt. Maha Laxmi
… Petitioner
Versus
Dev Raj
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Present: Mr. Krishan Singh Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Naveen Malik, Advocate for respondent.
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
Smt. Maha Laxmi filed a petition for eviction of the tenant from House No. 134, Phase II, Bapudham Colony, Sector 26, Chandigarh on the ground of non-payment of rent. It was stated in the petition that the premises is let out on 1st November, 1993 @ Rs.400/- per month. Thereafter, as per the oral agreement, rent was to be enhanced by 10 percent. Therefore, it was stated that in November, 1999, rent had been enhanced to Rs.520/- per month.
Admittedly, there is no written document between the parties in shape of rent note or rent agreement. Rent Controller relying upon the oral evidence of the landlord, determined the rent to be Rs.400/- per month and also believed increase of 10 percent. Tenant led the evidence and examined Smt. Kamla, who is the President of the Colony, to state that rate of rent was Rs.200/- per month and after lapse of one year, it was increased to Rs.300/- per month.
Rent Controller made assessment of rent and held that the tenant is liable to pay rent @ Rs.400/-; Rs.440/-; Rs.480/- and Rs.520/- per month, which was due on various dates, which has been noticed by the Rent Controller.
2
Civil Revision No. 1391 of 2004
Aggrieved against the same, an appeal was filed. Appellate Court came to the conclusion that the only point involved in the appeal is as to what is the exact rate of rent of the demised premises between the parties. Appellate Court held that no tenancy was reduced into writing. Reliance has been placed upon the testimony of RW-3 Lok Nath and it was held that initially, premises was given on rent @ Rs.200/- per month and the rent was later on increased to Rs.300/- per month. Witnesses had denied the suggestion of the landlady that 10 percent increase was stipulated in the rate of rent after every two years. The appellate Court also held that since the tenancy is stated to be oral, not a single document has been placed on record by the landlady to prove that 10 percent increase was agreed upon between the parties after every two years in the rate of rent.
The findings arrived at by the appellate Court below are based upon perusal and appreciation of the evidence and the facts. The view taken by the appellate Court is one, which can be formulated from the facts and circumstances of the case. The Rent Controller had gravely erred to hold that it was agreed between the parties that there shall be increase of 10 percent after every two years. Without any written document, such an increase could not be introduced by the Rent Controller.
Hence, I find no infirmity in the judgment of the lower appellate Court and the same is hereby upheld. Whatever is the amount due to the tenant, same shall be paid before the Rent Controller.
With these observations, present revision petition is
dismissed.
[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE
November 26, 2008 rps
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Rent Controller correctly held that there was an agreement to increase rent by 10 percent every two years in the absence of any written document.
Whether the Appellate Court correctly held that no tenancy was reduced into writing and no document proved the 10 percent increase.
Whether the current Revision Petitioner has any infirmity in the judgment of the lower Appellate Court.
Smt. Maha Laxmi
Dev Raj
Kanwalsingh Ahluwalia
Krishan Singh Dadwal
Naveen Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
