KUNDAN LAL Vs. SOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sohan Singh filed an eviction application under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, hereinafter referred to as the Act, against his tenant Kundan Lal on a number of grounds. After contest, the Rent Controller accepted that application and directed the tenant to vacate the premises within two months from the date of the order. Against that decision the tenant went in appeal. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal, but allowed the tenant 3 months' time for leaving the premises and delivering it possession to the landlord. The tenant has come here in revision against that order.

(2.) The only argument urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order passed by the Appellate Authority is contrary to law. He had, so argues the counsel, no jurisdiction to pass the same on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties. He had to give an independent finding as to whether the landlord had been able to establish any one of the grounds mentioned in section 13 of the Act for the eviction of the tenant. Since he had not done, so, his order was liable to be set aside.

(3.) The impugned order reads : "In accordance with the statements of the counsel for the parties, the appeal is hereby dismissed and the parties are left to bear their own costs. The appellant is allowed 3 months' time for vacating the premises and delivering its possession to the respondent."