SANT RAM JULKA Vs. HARJIT KAUR GREWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the tenant, challenging the judgment of the learned appellate authority, vide which the appeal filed by the landladies was allowed, ordering ejectment of the tenant from the demised premises.

(2.) FACTS in brief are that landladies filed ejectment petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, against the respondent-tenant, seeking his ejectment from the demised premises, on the ground that the tenant had materially impaired the value and utility of the demised premises by converting the window into a door. It was alleged that the tenant without the written consent of the landladies had removed the window on the western side towards Bastian road and had converted it into an entrance and is using the same for ingress and egress to the room on rent with him and had also damaged floor of the room and by these additions and alterations he had materially impaired the value and utility of the building in question. In the written reply filed by the tenant, it was denied that the window had been converted into a door for the purpose of ingress and egress or that the floor had been damaged. After hearing both sides learned Rent Controller dismissed the ejectment petition holding that the landladies had failed to prove that the tenant had made alterations in the building in question thereby materially impairing the value and utility of the said building. Resultantly, the ejectment petition was dismissed. However, the appeal filed by the landladies was accepted by the appellate authority, order passed by the Rent Controller was set aside and the ejectment petition filed by the landladies was allowed holding that the tenant had impaired the value and utility of the building in question by converting the window into a door. Aggrieved against the same, tenant filed the present revision petition in this Court. No one came present on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the record, in my opinion, the finding recorded by the learned appellate authority, regarding conversion of window into a door, is liable to be reversed. Similarly, the finding of learned appellate authority that the tenant had impaired the value and utility of the room in question by said conversion is also liable to be reversed.