JUDGMENT

Nirmaljit Kaur, J. - Both the aforementioned revision petitions shall stand decided by this common order as the issue involved is identical.

2. Both the revision petitions are filed by the petitioner/tenant against the dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority, whereby, the order of eviction, on the ground of arrears of rent, passed by the Rent Controller, was upheld.

3. The only argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that both the Courts below have ignored the provisions of Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. As per provision of Section 49 of the Registration Act, the rent deed could have been read only in case it was a registered document. The rent deed being admittedly an unregistered document cannot be relied upon for quantifying the rate of rent as has been done by the Courts below. Reliance was placed on the judgments rendered by this Court in the cases of Satwant Kaur vs. Narinder Singh, (2011) 1 R.C.R. (Civil) 214 and Pardeep Behal vs. Kanwaljit Kaur and others, (2012) 3 R.C.R. (Civil) 50, to contend that any rent note for exceeding a year or increasing yearly rent requires registration under Section 17 (1) (d) of the Registration Act,