RAM PARKASH Vs. AVINASH CHANDER SOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this revision petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to the judgment passed by the Rent Controller, vide which ejectment of the petitioner, from the demised premises, was ordered on 22nd February, 1999. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Rent Controller, the petitioner-tenant filed an appeal before the appellate authority, which was dismissed, vide judgment dated 17th August, 2000. Hence this Civil Revision.

(2.) IT is apparent from record that respondent-landlord filed an application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act') for ejectment of the petitioner from demised premises, description of which was given in the heading of the application and was marked and shown as'ABCDEFGH' in the spite plan put on record, on the ground of non-payment of rent and also on the ground that demised premises has become unsafe and unfit for human habitation.

(3.) ON appraisal of evidence, Rent Controller came to a conclusion that the rate of rent was Rs. 6.50 per month and tender made by the petitioner was found to be in order. Regarding second ground that the building is unsafe and unfit for human habitation, Rent Controller came to the conclusion that demised premises was in a dilapidated condition and has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. After looking into evidence on record, Rent Controller, in paras 11, 12 and 13 observed thus :-