RATTAN LAL Vs. LAL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-landlord is in revision petition aggrieved against the order passed by the authorities under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, whereby the ejectment sought on the ground of impairment of value and utility of the building was declined.

(2.) The ejectment has been sought on the ground that the tenant has raised a room in violation of the agreement. The landlord has examined Record Keeper Gurmukh Singh and Mohan Lal as AW1 and AW2 respectively and also appeared as AW3 as his own witness, whereas the tenant himself appeared as RW1 and examined Baldev Raj as RW2. The learned Rent Controller has also made spot inspection on 9-11-1981 and found that the pegs (Khuntas) have been fixed at 4-5 places for the purpose of tethering of cattle and that he could not see any cake of cow dung in the premises. The learned Rent Controller has also examined the first floor of the building as there were allegations that the tenant has removed latrine made on the roof top but the learned Rent Controller found that there did not exist any latrine for quite long. On the basis of such evidence, the learned Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition and which order was affirmed in appeal.

(3.) I have gone through the records of the case and found that the findings recorded by the authorities below are based upon appreciation of evidence, primarily the report of the Court itself. Such findings cannot be said to be suffering from any patent illegality or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court.