DES RAJ Vs. BRIJ LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by Des Raj tenant against the judgment of the Appellate Authority, Amritsar, dated 28th September, 1981.

(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that the landlord made an applications for ejectment of the tenant inter alia on the ground that he required the premises for his own use and occupation. He took various other pleas in the petition but no such plea survives in the revision. The petition was contested by the respondent who denied the allegations of the petitioner.

(3.) THE only question that arises for determination is whether the landlord requires the premises for his own use. The Appellate Authority after considering the evidence came to the conclusion that he required the premises bonafide for his own use and occupation. The finding is one of fact. It is well settled that in revision the finding of fact arrived at by the Appellate Authority cannot be up set. However, I have gone into the evidence also and find that there is no justification for interfering with the finding arrived at by the Appellate Authority. Brij Lal appeared in the witness-box and deposed that he had 11 members of the family. He was not cross-examined on that point. It is well settled that if a witness is not cross examined on a particular point, it well be considered that the other party accepts that part of his statement. He has in his possession one room, one kitchen and one store. It cannot be imagined that 11 persons can live in one room. Out of his sons two were married and one daughter and one son were of marriageable age After taking into consideration all the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that the conclusions arrived at by the Appellate Authority are correct and there is no scope for interference with the same.