OM PAL Vs. ANAND SWARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal by special leave by a tenant against the dismissal of his revision under S. 15 (5 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') by the High court, what falls for consideration is the manner of construing the words "acts as are likely to impair materially the value or utility of the building" occurring in S. 13 (2 (iii) of the Act.

(2.) A parchhati put up by the tenant/appellant in a shop taken on lease by him for running a dry cleaning laundry has been construedby the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority as an act causing material impairment to the building and the High court has affirmed their findings and dismissed the revision preferred by the appellant. The correctness of the order of the High court in revision is challenged in this appeal.

(3.) The facts are not in controversy and may briefly be stated as under. For running a dry cleaning shop the appellant had taken on lease a room from the respondent on a monthly rent of Rs. 30. 00. The appellant put up a parchhati in the shop for storing the clothes before and after dry cleaning. The parchhati has been made to rest on the walls by means of wooden ballis inserted in the wall through holes made therein.