Back
2013 Supreme(P&H) 1128
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JASBIR SINGH, G.S. SANDHAWALIA, JJ.
Kesar Singh - APPELLANT(S)
vs.
The Financial Commissioner, Haryana and others - RESPONDENT(S)
LPA No. 1433 of 2013 (O & M)
Decided On: September 16, 2013
Advocate Appeared
Mr. H.S. Baidwan, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. D. Khanna, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the applicant-respondent no. 5.
The willingness of the tenant to pay rent at a disputed lower rate, refusal of the landlord to accept it, and failure of authorities to consider vital documents supporting the lower rent rate led to irregularity and illegality in the eviction orders.
Headnote:
Ejectment - Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 - Section 14-A(i), East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 - 9(ii), 14A(i)
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was ordered to be evicted on the ground of non-payment of rent. The appellant disputed the rate of rent, offered to pay at a lower rate, but the landlord refused to accept. The authorities upheld the eviction orders without considering vital documents supporting the lower rate of rent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was willing to pay rent at a lower rate but was refused by the landlord. The authorities failed to consider vital documents supporting the lower rate of rent, leading to irregularity and illegality in the eviction orders.
Issues: Dispute over the rate of rent, refusal of landlord to accept lower rent, failure of authorities to consider vital documents supporting lower rent rate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's willingness to pay rent at a lower rate and the refusal of the landlord to accept it, along with the failure of authorities to consider vital documents supporting the lower rent rate, led to irregularity and illegality in the eviction orders.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, and the eviction orders were set aside. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector Ist Grade to decide the issue afresh within a period of six months after considering the vital documents.
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, (J.)
Application is allowed. Reply and documents filed on behalf of respondent no. 5 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. LPA No. 1433 of 2013
1. The present judgment shall dispose of three appeals i.e. LPA Nos. 1433, 1547 and 1548 of 2013, as common question of fact and law is involved in all the three cases. The facts are being taken from LPA No. 1433 of 2013, Kesar Singh vs. Financial Commissioner, Haryana and others arising out of CWP No. 16264 of 2013 decided on 30.07.2013.
2. The learned Single Judge, vide the impugned judgment, dismissed the writ petitions, which challenged the ejectment of the appellant on the ground of non-payment of rent from Rabi 1993, which had been ordered initially by the Assistant Collector on 09.11.2011 (Annexure P-4) and thereafter upheld in appeal by the Collector on 24.01.2012 (Annexure P-6) and further upheld by the Commissioner on 06.07.2012 (Annexure P-7) and in the second revision by the Financial Commissioner on 15.07.2013 (Annexure P-9). The submission made before the learned Single Judge was that Section 14-A(i) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (in short 'the Act') was pari materia to Section 13(2)(i) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 and Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973. The reliance of the appellants on Rakesh Wadhawan and others vs. Jagdamba Industrial Corporation and others, 2002 (2) PLR 370 was distinguished on the ground that in that case the amount tendered by the tenant was found to be short and, therefore, invalid and the tenants were ordered to be evicted by the authorities below, which was subsequently set aside. It was held that in the present case, that once the tenant had denied the liability to pay the rent, the question of assessment would not arise since he had taken the plea that he had already paid the rent and was not obliged to pay the rent. It was further recorded that the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, on 29.10.1995, had given an opportunity to the counsel to deposit the amount before the next date of hearing but the appellant had taken the plea that he had already made the payment and, therefore, was not in arrears.
3. The factual aspect is necessary to be adverted to in the present case in view of the submission made by counsel for the appellant that he had offered to pay the rent but the landlord had refused to accept the same.
Perusal of the written statement filed in the ejectment application for land measuring 20 kanals 8 marlas situated in village Sambli, Tehsil Nissing, District Karnal on the ground of non-payment of rent would show that a plea was taken by the appellant that the application was not maintainable and he had already paid the rent of `100/-per acre and the ejectment on the ground that the rate of rent was `6000/-per acre was not correct. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade, on 09.11.2011, came to the conclusion that the appellant was a tenant in the land in question as per the revenue record and there was no mention of rent and the onus was upon him to prove the fact regarding the rate of rent by producing the receipts of Batai. Accordingly, it was held that the amount demanded was legally proper @`6000/-per acre. Since nothing had been paid since Rabi 1993, the ejectment was ordered.
4. As noticed above, the said orders were upheld by the revenue authorities. It is, however, important to note that before the written statement was filed, Assistant Collector Ist Grade, on 26.10.1995, had given an opportunity to the appellant to deposit the amount of the disputed crops of the land in dispute before the date fixed. Relevant portion of the zimini order is reproduced as under:-
“Counsel for the parties are present. Now case be put up on 16.11.95 for written statement. If counsel of the respondents wants to deposit the amount of the disputed crops of the land in dispute, then he can do so before the date fixed.
Sd/- A.C. Ist Grade
26.10.95”
5. Thereaft
