The burden of proof is on the landlord to prove that the tenant is a defaulter in payment of rent, and the tenant must prove that he offered to pay the rent and the landlord refused to accept it in order to comply with the provisions of Section 5(4) of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972.

ORDER :- This revision petition has been preferred by the Revision petitioner against the judgment and decree dated 31-10-95 passed by the Assistant District Judge, Dibrugarh in Title Appeal No. 39 of 1985 reversing the judgment and decree dated 31-7-85 and 3-8-85 respectively passed by the Munsiff No. 1, Dibrugarh in Title Suit No. 111 of 1981.

2. The respondent as plaintiff filed the above mentioned Title Suit against the Revision Petitioner as defendant for ejectment from the suit premises on the ground of defaulter, bona fide requirement and unauthorised construction.

3. The plaintiff/respondents case was that he is the owner of the suit premises described in the Schedule of the plaint. The suit premises originally belonged to M/s. Jugal Kishore Kanaiyalal at New Market, Dibrugarh. Being the Karta of the undivided Hindu family, the plaintiff became the owner of the property in question by a partial partition amongst the family members and became the absolute owner,thereof. The defendant came into occupation of the premises as monthly tenant according to English Calendar month agreeing to pay rent at the end of each English month. Further agreement was that the defendant will not make any alteration, addition or any new construction; that he will vacate and deliver the khas possession of the premises to the plaintiff whenever called upon to do so; that the defendant will use the premises with care and caution and maintain it properly. The rent was subsequently raised to Rs. 121/- per month from 1-7-1972. The defendant became irregular and ultimately defaulted to pay rent since 1980 and made unauthorised constructions to the premises in spite of protest from the plaintiff. The plaintiff further also claimed the bona fide requirement of the suit premises for re-construction of the same and for his own use and occupation. Further prayer for khas possession of the suit premises, the plaintiff claimed for arrear rent with effect from September, 1980 to February, 1981 and compensation at the rate of Rs. 10 / - per diem up to 7-12-1981.

4. In the plaint as well as in the evidence, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant was a defaulter from September, 1980 and not from earlier date.

5. The defendants case is that he came to occupy the suit premises in the year 1950; that the monthly rent was never agreed to be payable regularly at the end of each month and that he was allowed to pay the rent at his convenience and not beyond five months at a time, since, he had no source of fixed income at that time; that the defendant on his own by and large paid the rent regularly though it was never the essence of the lease. Further defendants stand is that he was allowed to make any addition, alteration or new construction in the suit premises as per his convenience and requirement at his own cost and was allowed to occupy the same so long as he desired. The defendant further stated that the tenancy was continued as before by enhancing rent from time to time under the plaintiff as Karta of M/s. Jugal Kishore Kanaiyalal, an Hindu undivided family; that the defendant did not attorn to the plaintiff as the owner of the suit premises as the defendant has no notice of it. That the plaintiff was the absolute owner of the suit premises, but in the course of argument Mr. Goswami submits that there is no dispute regarding the relationship as landlord and tenant and this relationship has not been denied by the defendant. Therefore the relationship of landlord and tenant has been admitted and defendants objection regarding the title of the plaintiff is not required to be examined. It is also admitted position that the landlord / plaintiff issued receipt for each payment of rent and accordingly the rent for the months of July 1979, August, 1979, September, 1979, October, 1979 and November 1979 were paid on 1-8-79, 1-9-79, 1-10-79, 1-11-79 and 1-12-79 respectively and receipts were given on the