The burden is on the tenant to substantiate the plea of rent discharge, and S.9 of the Act is important in protecting the tenant's rights.

Balasubramanyan, J.

The tenant of a non-residential building within the meaning of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, hereinafter called the Act, is the petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. The landlord, the respondent herein, filed an application, R.C.P.25 of 1986 on the file of the Rent Control Court, Trivandrum, for eviction of the petitioner under S.11(2) and S.11(4) (iv) of the Act. Claim under S.11(4)(iv) of the Act was found against by the Rent Controller and was not pursued by the landlord before the appellate Authority. We are therefore not concerned with that claim in this Civil Revision Petition.

2. The landlord sought eviction of the petitioner under S.11(2) of the Act on the allegation that the rent was in arrears from July 1984 at the rate of Rs. 35/- per month and that inspite of issuance of notice Ext. Al under the proviso to S.11(2)(b) of the Act, the tenant has not paid the rent and that therefore the landlord is entitled to an order for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent. The tenant opposed the application disputing the rate of rent and also pleading that the rent was not in arrears and the landlord was seeking to take undue advantage of the fact that she was not in the habit of issuing receipts for the payment of rent. The tenant therefore submitted that the claim for eviction is not bonafide or meritorious and therefore the application liable to be dismissed.

3. The Rent Controller found that the rate of rent was Rs.15/- per month and not Rs. 35/-per month as claimed by the landlord. This finding was also accepted by the landlord before the appellate Authority and therefore we have to proceed in this Revision on she basis that the rent for the building is Rs. 151- per month.

4. The evidence in the case essentially consisted of the notice Ext. Al, reply notice Ext. A3 and the oral evidence of the landlord and the tenant. The Rent Controller entered a finding that the landlord has not proved that the rent was in arrears as it was quite possible that she may not have issued receipts to the tenant as she had admitted in her evidence that she was not in the habit of issuing receipts to her other tenants who were regular in paying their rent. The Rent Controller therefore dismissed the application for eviction. In the appeal by the landlord the appellate Authority after an advertence to S.9 of the Act, the notice Ext. Al and the reply notice Ext. A3 and the oral evidences of the landlord and the tenant came to the conclusion than on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tenant on whom lay the burden to prove the discharge of rent set up by him, has failed to substantiate that plea and that therefore the landlord's evidence that the rent was in arrears is liable to be accepted. The appellate Authority therefore reversed the order of the Rent Controller and ordered eviction under S.11(2) of the Act.

5. It is submitted by Sri. Sankarasubban learned counsel for the tenant-revision petitioner that the appreciation of evidence by the appellate Authority is not proper, that the burden is on the landlord to make out a claim for eviction under S.11(2) of the Act and that therefore it was not part of the burden of the tenant to establish a plea of discharge as if it were in a civil suit. He also submitted that undue importance has been given by the appellate Authority to the provisions contained in S.9 of the Act and that the appellate Authority has also not fully appreciated the effect of some of the admissions of the landlord examined as PW1. He therefore submits that the order of the appellate Authority is liable to be interfered with in Revision by this court.

6. Section 9 of the Act provides that a tenant is entitled to demand and obtain a receipt for the payment of rent made by him to the landlord. It also provides that in a case where the landlord refuses to issue receipt, it is open to the tenant to sent the rent by way of money order after deducting the money orde