Compliance with provisional assessment of rent is crucial for an order of eviction, and grounds for eviction must be part of the main ejectment petition.

JUDGMENT

Alka Sarin, J. - Heard through video conferencing.

2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the landlady-petitioner against the order dated 11.01.2021 passed by the Rent Controller, Jagadhari dismissing her interim application for eviction of the tenant-respondent on the grounds of non-payment rent, damaging the suit property and for changing the nature of the suit property by raising construction.

3. The facts in brief are that on 03.07.2019 the landlady-petitioner filed an ejectment petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 before the Rent Controller, Jagadhari seeking eviction of the tenant-respondent from the demised premises on certain grounds including non-payment of rent for two months i.e. from01.06.2019 to 30.07.2019. Notice was issued to the tenant-respondent. Thereafter, vide order dated 27.02.2020 the Rent Controller, Jagadhari provisionally assessed the rent and passed the following order (Annexure P-

1):

"Today, the case is fixed for provisional assessment of rent.

In view of the observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case titled as Rakesh Wadawan Versus Jagdama Industrial Corporation 2000(2) The Punjab Law Reporter 370, after hearing both the parties, the provisional rent is being assessed as under: -

Now, the case is adjourned to 12.03.2020 for payment of assessed rent."

4. On 12.03.2020 the provisional rent as assessed was tendered by the tenant-respondent and the same was accepted by the landlady-petitioner under protest. On 12.03.2020 the issues were also framed and the case was adjourned for evidence of the landlady-petitioner. The order dated 12.03.2020 passed by the Rent Controller, Jagadhari (as available on the Court website) reads as under :

"Provisionally assessed rent has been tendered by respondent and the same has been accepted by applicant under protest vide recorded their separate statements.

From the pleadings of the parties following issues are hereby framed:-

1. Whether the respondent is liable to be ejected from the demised premises as prayed for? OP A

2. Whether the present application is not maintainable? OPR

3. Relief.

No other issue is pressed or claimed. Now, the case is adjourned to 07.04.2020 for evidence of applicant on filing of PF, DM and list of witness etc. within 15 days failing which evidence should be brought at own responsibility. The applicant is directed to tender his evidence first, as per provision of Order 18 Rule 3A, CPC."

5. Thereafter, the ejectment petition was adjourned on some dates due to the Covid-19 Pandemic. In August 2020, the landlady-petitioner filed an interim application (Annexure P-2) before the Rent Controller, Jagadhari stating therein that the tenant-respondent had not made any payment of rent w.e.f. 31.07.2019 till date and had violated the order dated 27.02.2020. It was also averred that on 05.08.2020 the tenant-respondent had started collecting building material and threatened to make additions/alterations and that the tenant-respondent had carried out certain additions/alterations illegally and changed the nature of the demised premises. On these allegations it was prayed in the interim application that the tenant-respondent be evicted on the grounds of non-payment of rent, damaging the suit property and for changing the nature of the suit property by raising construction.

6. The tenant-respondent contested this interim application and filed reply. Vide order dated 11.01.2021 the Rent Controller, Jagadhari dismissed the interim application (Annexure P-2) of the landlady-petitioner for eviction of the tenant-respondent on the grounds of non-payment rent, damaging the suit property and for changing the nature of the suit property by raising construction. The main ejectment petition was adjourned to 05.02.2021 for evidence of the landlady-peti