RAM NATH Vs. SHRI KANTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Appellate Authority, Ferozepur, dated 7.1.1994. By virtue of the same, learned Appellate Authority set aside the order of the learned Rent Controller, Ferozepur, dated 19.10.1992 and instead passed an order of eviction against the petitioner giving him a period of three months to vacate the premises.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that respondent Shri Kanth had preferred a petition for eviction against the petitioner with respect to the suit premises The sole surviving ground of eviction in the present revision petition is as to if the property in question has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation or not. The respondent's case was that the property in question has become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. The entire structure is old and can fall at any time. The roof of the rooms and the kitchen are made of sirkies and balas. The sirkies are in broken condition. The roof was also stated to be broken at places and open to sky. The walls of the rooms were made of old type bricks with mud mortar. The mud plaster had broken down at many places. Deep cracks had developed in the walls. Similarly, roof of the kitchen was stated to be made of same material and cracks are stated to have developed in the said roof. It can fall at any time. Plea was raised that roof of the barsati on the first floor was also made of sirkies and wooden balas. The roof was in broken condition. The walls of barsati were stated to be made with bricks of old type and mud but were not plastered with any material or mud. The entire structure was stated to be in a dilapidated condition Which can fall at any time. The southern portion of the house was stated to be in the possession of one Iqbal Singh. The portion in possession of Iqbal Singh was also made of similar material and had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. That portion had fallen down. The debris is lying in the courtyard.

(3.) THE learned Rent Controller on appreciation of evidence held that it has not been established that the property in question is unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The petition had been dismissed.