This Civil Second Appeal under sec.100 C.P.C. arises out of the judgment and decree dated 11.5.1994 passed by learned District Judge Jammu whereby the suit of the plaintiff decreed by the learned City Judge, Jammu vide his judgment dated 11.9.1990 has been dismissed.

2. The original defendant, the predecessor-in-interest of the respondent herein was the tenant of the suit premises at a monthly rental of Rs. 70/-. The tenancy commenced in March 1970.The defendant/tenant has executed a rent note in favour of the plaintiff/landlord. The plaintiff who is appellant herein filed a suit for ejectment of the defendant/tenant on the twin grounds; one that the defendant has committed three defaults towards the payment of rent being in arrears since March 1981 to the date of the filing of the suit i.e. February 1985; two; that plaintiff needs the suit premises for his personal use and occupation. Learned trial court by its judgment and decree dated 11.19.1990 decreed the suit of the plaintiff on the sole ground of commission of three defaults in payment of rent by the defendant and rejected the claim of the plaintiff in respect of his personal necessity.

3. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial court the defendant/tenant filed an appeal before the court of District Judge Jammu. Learned District Judge by his judgment and decree dated 11.5.1994 reversed the judgment and decree of the trial court and dismissed the suit, hence the present appeal of the landlord/plaintiff.

4. For hearing the second appeal following substantial questions of law have been formulated:-

1- Is the judgment of the Ist Appellate court perverse in so far as the same is not based upon any evidence?

2- What is the exact period of three defaults to bring the case within the purview of section 11(i) of Houses and Shops Rent Control Act?

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case thoroughly.

6. The counsel for the parties have addressed their submissions on the first question alone. Therefore I am restricting myself to the decision of this case on first question only.

7. From the perusal of the judgment of the first appellate court it appears that learned appellate court took up for examination the findings of the learned trial court returned for deciding issue Nos.5&6. As the case of the defendant/tenant was that he had paid the rent firstly to Lala Mela Ram and then to his widow, the defendant was required to prove the said fact. The defendant has admitted the execution of the rent deed. One of the recitals of the deed is:-

بیان کیا Ú©Û Ù…Ø¸Ûر Ù†Û’ سال1970ءمیں ÛŒÛ Ù…Ú©Ø§Ù† Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù¾Ø± لیا تھا۔ ÛŒÛ Ù…Ú©Ø§Ù† مدعی کا کلکیتی تھا۔ اور Ù„Ø§Ù„Û Ù…ÛŒÙ„Û Ø±Ø§Ù… ایڈوکیٹ ولی مدعی تھا Û” اÙس سے مظÛر Ù†Û’ Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ù…Ø¯Ø¹ÛŒ Ø¨Ø°Ø±ÛŒØ¹Û Ù„Ø§Ù„Û Ù…ÛŒÙ„Û Ø±Ø§Ù… تحریر کر Ú©Û’ دیا تھا ÛŒÛ Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ø¬Ùˆ Ú©Û Ø¢Ø¬ مظÛر Ú©Ùˆ دکھایا گیا ÛÛ’ جو مظÛر Ù†Û’ بحق مدعی تحریر کر Ú©Û’ دیا تھا اس Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ú©Û’ مطابق جو بھی Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù…Ø¸Ûر Ù†Û’ ادا کیا تھا ÙˆÛ Ø§Ø³ Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ú©Û’ برپشت پر درج ÛÛ’Û” دیر وصولی Ú©Û’ نیچے مظÛر Ú©Û’ دستخط موجود Ûیں۔ Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ù…Ø´Ù…ÙˆÙ„ مثل Ú©Û’ مطابق آخری ادائیگی Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ 6-9-76Ú©Ùˆ دی تھی ÛŒÛ Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù…Ø¸Ûر Ù†Û’ ڈیڑھ ماÛ19-10-74تا 15-12-74ادا کیا ÛÛ’Û” ÛŒÛ Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ù…Ø¸Ûر Ù†Û’ تحریر کر Ú©Û’ دیا تھا۔ اس Ú©Ø±Ø§ÛŒÛ Ù†Ø§Ù…Û Ù¾Ø±

(ای ایکس Ù¾ÛŒ ڈبلیو۔ای٠این) لگایاجاتا ÛÛ’Û”

So the defendant had to prove payment of rent either by producing receipts or on the basis of acknowledgement of the rent on the reverse of rent note. The last acknowledgement of rent on the reverse of the rent note is of 6.9.1976 for payment of rent up to 5.12.1974. The defendant has not produced any receip

Click Here to Read the rest of this document