RATTAN SARUP Vs. DES RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's petition against whom eviction order has been passed by both the authorities below. The landlord Des Raj sought the ejectment of his tenant from the premises in dispute consisting of two rooms with verandah on both the sides, inter alia, on the ground that after the coming into force of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short, 'the Act'), the tenant has constructed his own house in Misheran Street, Mohalla Chakarvarti, Thanesar, which was sufficient for his needs and therefore, he was liable for ejectment. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenant it was pleaded that the demised premises were being used by him as godown for storing his business articles, such as books, stationery etc. The premises are situated in the main bazar and were let out for non-residential purpose. However, the construction of the house by the tenant, as alleged by the landlord, was admitted. On trial learned Rent Controller found that the premises were let out for residence and not for using the same as non-residential building, as alleged by the tenant. Since the tenant has constructed a house which was found to be sufficient for his residence, the eviction order was passed against him. In appeal, the learned Appellate Authority affirmed the said finding of the Rent Controller and, thus, maintained the order of eviction. Aggrieved with the same, the tenant has filed this revision petition.

(2.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in this petition. On the appreciation of the entire evidence, it has been found as of fact by both the authorities below that the premises in dispute were described in the rent deed as chobara and it was let out for residential purpose. This being a finding of fact, could not be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction.

(3.) Since the construction of the house by the tenant which was found sufficient for his residence was not disputed, the eviction order was rightly passed by both the authorities below. Consequently, the petition fails and is dismissed with costs. However, the tenant is allowed the three months' time to vacate the premises provided all the arrears of rent, if any, and advance rent for three months is deposited in the Court of the Rent Controller within one month.