VARUN KUMAR Vs. GANGADHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER challenge in this revision filed by the tenant is the judgment of the Rent Control Appellate Authority ordering eviction against the revision petitioner on the ground under clause (v) of sub section (4) of Section 11 i.e. cessation of occupation without reasonable cause continuously for a period of more than six months.The tenant's defence to the allegation that he has ceased to occupy the building for a period of six months without reasonable cause was one of denial. It was contended that he is conducting wholesale grocery business in another shop under the name and style of 'Varun Agency'. Further contention was that the building is occupied by him as a godownfor Varun Agency. The Advocate Commissioner deputed by the Rent Control Court filed a report which was not very much in favour of the landlord. Relying on that report and evaluating the evidence adduced by the parties, the Rent Control Court came to the conclusion that the eviction ground under section 11(4)(v) was established and accordingly ordered eviction under that ground, entering the finding that there is a cessation of occupation. The learned Rent Control Court placed strong reliance on the circumstance that the electrical energy consumption in this room during the statutory period of six months was minimal.

(2.) THE tenant carried the matter in appeal to the learned Appellate Authority. THE Appellate Authority concurred with the Rent Control Court taking the view that the evidence adduced by the tenant fall short of holding that he is conducting Varun Agency. According to the Appellate Authority, there is no evidence to hold that Varun Agency business is being conducted by the tenant. In that view of the matter, the eviction order was sustained and the appeal was dismissed.

(3.) WE have very anxiously considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar. Though the findings are concurrent, we have made a reappraisal of the entire evidence. WE feel that the last request of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, that an opportunity be given to the revision petitioner for production of documentary evidence to show that he is using the building in question as godown for Varun Agency, can be granted imposing proper conditions.