RAMESH CHAND Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is landlord's revision petition whose ejectment application has been dismissed by both the authorities below.

(2.) THE landlord sought the ejectment of the tenant from the house, in dispute, inter alia on the grounds that he required the demised premises for his own use and occupation the tenant had impaired its value and utility by constructing a tin-shed in the compound thereof and that the building had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The ejectment application was filed on April 20, 1979. The learned Rent Controller found that the landlord had failed to prove that he was in bonafide need of the house, in dispute, for his residents. He also found that the construction of the tin-shed therein did not affect its value and utility. The plea regarding the building having become unsafe and unfit for human habitation was also negatived. It was observed that the landlord had led no evidence to prove the same. In view of these findings, the ejectment application was dismissed. In appeal the Appellate Authority affirmed the said findings of the Rent Controller and, thus, maintained the order dismissing the ejectment application. Dissatisfied with the same, the landlord has come up in revision to this Court.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant evidence including the report, Exhibit A.W. 5/1, on the record.