DARSHAN KUMAR Vs. MAHESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a tenant petition filed under sub-section (5) of Section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in brevity the Act), challenging concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below holding that the demised premises have become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and therefore, the tenant/petitioner is liable to be evicted. Accepting the report of Sh. G.S. Consel, opining that the building has been rendered unfit and unsafe on account of various reasons, the learned Appellate Court affirmed the findings recorded by the Rent Controller vide his order dated 3.3.1998. Sh. G.S. Consel had appeared as AW1 who proved his detailed report Ex. A-1 and site plan Ex. A-2. The views of the Appellate Authority in this regard read as under :-

(2.) THE Appellate Authority has come to the conclusion that Sh. Bakshish Singh, Local Commissioner, who visited the spot at the instance of the respondent submitted his report Ex. R-1 but he failed to rebut the report submitted by Sh. G.S. Consel, because Sh. Bakshish Singh RW1 did not mention the condition of each and every door, windows, ventilator, almirah, floor, roof, walls, electric fitting etc. It has further been concluded that when Sh. G.S. Consel appeared as a witness and he with-stood the searching cross examination conducted on him. Sh. Bakshish Singh RW-1, however, admitted as a witness that the building in question is built of 'B' class construction and that Nanak Shahi bricks used in raising construction were in vogue about 70 years ago. Sh. Bakshish Singh also admitted that the building is around 60 years old and it has out-lived its age. He also admitted that there were some holes of one inch by one inch on the western wall. On the basis of various other admissions made by Sh. Bakshish Singh-RW1, the appellate Court accepted the report submitted by AW1 Sh. G.S. Consel. The report of Sh. G.S. Consel reads as under :-

(3.) MR . K.S. Cheema, learned counsel for the landlord/respondent has pointed out that the findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below show that the entire building is constructed by the use of Nanak Shahi bricks and it is a B Class construction. The life of B Class construction is 50-60 years and Nanak Shahi bricks were in use about 70 years back. For want of maintenance the entire building has outlived its life and it is admitted by RW-1 Sh. Bakshish Singh that there are holes to the extent of one inch by one inch in one of the walls. The learned counsel has further argued that the findings of facts recorded by the Courts below are unlikely to be interfered by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction under sub-Section (5) of Section 15 of the Act because there is no documentary evidence left out of consideration or any other irrelevant evidence taken into consideration.