JAGDISH Vs. SANJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's petition filed under sub-section (6) of Section 15 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 (for brevity the Act) challenging concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below that the demised premises has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. These findings have been recorded on issue No. 3 which is the sole issue that survives for consideration before this Court. The findings on Issue No. 3 are based on the report Ex. P-2/A submitted by one Sh. Om Parkash, S.D.O., who made the spot inspection as a Local Commissioner and the statement made by PW-2 Sh. Sanjay Kumar, the landlord respondent himself. The analysis of the evidence produced by both the parties has been made by the Appellate Authority, which reads as under :

(2.) I have heard Sh. Jagdev Sharma, learned counsel for the tenant-petitioners, who has argued that the Local Commissioner appointed by the Court namely Sh. Om Parkash Sharma, S.D.O., who has presented his report Ex. P-2/A and site plan Ex. P-2/C has not appeared before the Court in order to prove those documents nor he has faced the cross-examination of the tenant-petitioners. The learned counsel has further argued that the building has not become unfit and unsafe as has been held by both the Courts below. According to him, if the adjoining shop has fallen, it would not ipso-facto lead to the conclusion that the demised premises must also be held to be dilapidated.

(3.) THE power of revision to interfere under Section 15(6) of the Act is limited to a case when the findings recorded by the Rent Controller or Appellate Authority are without any evidence. It has been repeatedly held that the revisional powers of the High Court under Section 15(6) of the Act would not include the power to reverse the concurrent findings of the Courts below without showing that those findings were erroneous or without evidence. The main object of the revisional power vested in the High Court is that it should satisfy itself as to the legality and property of the order under revision. Sub-section (6) of Section 15 of the Act is reproduced below for facility of reference