RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. LALA DINA NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision arises out of an order dated 1.4.1976 of the Appellate Authority under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Act) affirming the order of the Rent Controller dated 22.12.1975 whereby an application made by the tenant-petitioner under section 12 of the Act for an order for carrying out repairs to the demised premises was dismissed.

(2.) THE tenant-petitioner in brief stated in his application under section 12 of the Rent Act filled on 17th of March, 1974 that he was a tenant and Shri Dina Nath, respondent, was the landlord qua the house in dispute and that the said house was in an extremely dilapidated condition. There were many holes in its roof through which rain water enters the houses, many rafters has also broken and were hanging, and the walls were also in a bad condition. It was further alleged that the windows of the house were in an extremely damaged condition, that the landlord had never got the house white-washed, that the roof of the house could collapse any moment and consequently the tenant-petitioner remained under constant danger. The tenant-petitioner therefore, applied to the Rent Controller that the landlords-respondent be directed to carry out the repairs of the house and in case of his failure to do so, the tenant-petitioner should be permitted to do so and the expenditure incurred by him be allowed to be deducted from the rent payable to the landlord.

(3.) THE application was then set down for evidence of the parties for 1.10.1974. On 1.10.1974 although no witness was present the learned counsel for the parties stated before the Rent Controller that the parties intended to effect a compromise. The case was then adjourned to 22.10.1974, again to 27.1.1975 and then to 24.3.1975. But it appears that no compromise was effected and on 26.3.1975 the Rent Controller adjourned the case to 23.6.1975 for the production of evidence of the parties. On 23.6.1975 no witness was, however, present and the case was adjourned to 6.10.1975. THus it appears that the only date on which the case was adjourned due to failure of parties to produce the evidence, was 23.6.1975. A persual of the file further shows that before 6.10.1975 two developments took place. The tenant-petitioner made a prayer before the Rent Controller that there was a danger to the occupants of the house and the same needed urgent repairs. On 8.8.1975 the Rent Controller passed the following orders:-