PARKASH CHAND Vs. THAKUR DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed by the tenant-petitioners under sub- section (5) of section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for brevity, 'the Act'), challenges concurrent finding of fact on the issue as to whether the tenant-petitioners have made material alterations in the demised premises resulting in impairment of its value and utility. Both the courts below have concurrently found that there are material alterations and additions made by the tenant-petitioners in the demised premises without the permission of the landlord-respondents resulting in impairment of its value and utility.

(2.) THE landlord-respondents are owners of the demised premises which were let out to tenant-petitioner No. 1 Sh. Parkash Chand, at a monthly rent of Rs. 750/-. A rent note dated 1st June, 1969 for a period of one year was executed. The tenancy having continued even after the period of one year, acquired a statutory character. The landlord-respondents filed ejectment petition under section 13 of the Act on the grounds of non-payment of rent w.e.f. 1st October, 1980, personal necessity of one of the landlord-respondent, namely, Shri Jagdish Chand, subletting by tenant-petitioner No. 1 to tenant-petitioner No. 2 to 7 and that the tenant-petitioners Nos. 3 to 7 have made material and unauthorised additions and alterations affecting the utility and value of the demised premises. The only ground which survives for consideration of this Court is the last one.

(3.) APART from the finding that there were structural alterations and additions, learned Appellate Authority also raised adverse inference from the fact that only tenant-petitioner No. 1 had appeared as a witness in support of the defence. His statement has not been considered significant for the reason that he has not been staying in the premises and as such the first hand knowledge and information which could have come forward from those who were staying in the demised premises, did not come forward. This fact further fortified the conclusion that material alterations and additions have been made in the demised premises.