Full Judgment
Anjani Kumar, J.
1. The landlord filed a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment against the petitioner who was a tenant of the accommodation in dispute. There was some dispute as to what was the amount of the rent. The trial court after discussing the evidence and pleadings arrived at the conclusion that the rent was Rs. 50 per month. The further dispute was over and above Rs. 50. The tenant is further liable to pay the water tax which he was admittedly not paying.
2. in this view of the matter, the suit was decreed by the trial court. The revisional court maintained the order of the trial court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the finding of issue Nos. 3 and 4 are recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the revisional court, suffers from error of law. It to a perverse finding.
3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once the Court after discussion of the evidence and pleadings arrived at the conclusion that the rent is found to be Rs. 50, no further liability of payment of water tax can be imposed. The courts below have relied upon the provisions of Section 7 of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972. Section 7 runs as under :
'7. Liability to pay taxes.--Subject to any contract in writingto the contrary butnotwithstanding anythingcontained in Section 179 of theUttar Pradesh Nagar MahapalikaAdhlniyam. 1959 (U. P. Act No. IIof 19591 or in Section 149 or inany rule made or notificationissued under Section 338 of theUnited Provinces MunicipalitiesAct. 1916 (U. P, Act II of 1916) orin Section 14 (1) (e) of the UnitedProvinces Town Areas Act, 1914(U. P. Act II of 1914(, the lenanlshall be liable to pay to thelandlord in addition to and aspart of the rent, the followingtaxes or proportionate partthereof, if any, payable in respectof the building or part under histenancy, namely :
(a) the water tax ;
(b) twenty-five per cent of every such enhancement in house tax made after the commencement of this Act, or such portion thereof, as is not occasioned on account of the increase in the assessment of the building as a result of the enhancement of rent under the provisions of Section 5 :
Provided that nothing in this section shall apply in relation to a tenant the rate of rent payable by whom for the time being (excluding any enhancement of rent under provisions of Section 5) does not exceed twenty-five rupees per month.'
4. Perusal of Section 7 will demonstrate that the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. No other point was argued. In view of the provisions of Section 7, the view taken by the courts below cannot be said to be suffering from error of law.
5. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the petition is dismissed.
6. There will be no order as to cost.