The main legal point established in the judgment is that non-registration of a rent agreement does not make it void or inadmissible in evidence under the Punjab Rent Act, 1995.

JUDGMENT

Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral). - This shall dispose of above mentioned four revision petitions filed by the tenant qua two premises upon which he entered as a tenant w.e.f. 15.1.2017 under two separate agreements dated 1.12.2016. The main facts are being taken from CR No. 8023 of 2019.

2. The common gamut of facts; as can be culled out from the pleadings of the parties are that; the respondent is the owner of the two properties mentioned in the petition; situated in the buildings of M/s Roop Square Private Limited (known as Roop Square Complex), Ghumar Mandi, Mahal Baghat, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. The petitioner had taken the top floor and the 4th floor of the premises on rent from the respondent/landlord vide two separate written agreements dated 1.12.2016. The rent for the top floor was agreed at the rate of Rs. One lakh per month along with 5% increase per annum. The rent for the 4th floor was agreed to be Rs. 4 lakhs per month with a similar increase of 5% per annum. The duration of the said tenancy was fixed to be nine years. As per the allegations, the petitioner paid the rent for 5 months with intermittent defaults in case of premises on top floor and thereafter, defaulted in payments. Almost similar has been the position qua the 4 th floor. The respondent/landlord alleges that he had verbally requested the petitioner for making the payment of defaulted amount. After request, some payments were made. However, again, the default was started and is still continuing. As a result, no rent is being paid to the respondent/landlord. Although the petitioner as a tenant is enjoying the property, however, he has not been paying even the electricity charges or any other taxes and charges leviable by the Government. On the contrary, the respondent/landlord is being forced to pay the GST leviable on the rent, electricity charges and other charges leviable by the Government. As a result, the respondent/landlord had filed two separate petitions under the Punjab Rent Act, 1995 (in short 'the Act'), for recovery of possession from the petitioner for non payment of rent; as well as, claiming his personal requirement so as to expand his business. The petitioner/tenant appeared before the Rent Authority and filed the written statement. However, the petitioner also filed application stating the same to be under Section 20 (2) of the Act, in which it was prayed that since the respondent/landlord had not given him the notice in the prescribed form as required by Section 20 (2) of the Act, therefore, the eviction petitions itself were not maintainable and, therefore, deserved to be rejected. But the Rent Authority dismissed the same in both the petitions vide order dated 26.10.2018.

3. However, since the petitioner/tenant had also filed the written statements, therefore, taking into consideration the pleadings of the parties, the Rent Authority framed the issues for its determination vide order dated 14.3.2019.

4. Aggrieved against the above said two orders dismissing his applications for rejection of the eviction petitions, passed by the Rent Authority, the petitioner/tenant filed two appeals before the Appellate Authority questioning the order passed by the Rent Authority. Similarly, aggrieved against not ordering immediate eviction of the tenant and framing of issues, in both the petitions, the respondent/landlord also preferred two appeals before the Rent Authority. Therefore, the Appellate Authority considered four appeals, two filed by the petitioner/tenant and two filed by the respondent/ landlord. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeals filed by the petitioner and held that the application for rejection of the eviction petitions had rightly been dismissed by the Rent Authority. In the appeal filed by the respondent/landlord, the Appellate Authority held that since the rent has not been paid by the tenant and the default continued even during the pendency of the proceedings before the Rent Authority, therefore, the tenant w