SURTA Vs. KAILASH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's petition under Section 15 (6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), directed against the judgment passed by the Appellate Authority, ordering ejectment of the petitioner on the ground that the demised shop has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the demised shop is in possession of the tenant since 1957-58 on monthly rent of Rs. 32/-. In the year 1973, the respondent-landlords filed the ejectment application against Desu (who died during the pendency of the petition and whose son Surta, the present petitioner, was substituted as his legal representative) on the grounds of non-payment of rent and the demised shop having become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. It was pleaded by the landlords that the demised shop is very old and was constructed with bricks and earth having wooden battens that the walls, floor and roof of the shop were completely in dilapidated condition. It was also pleaded that floor of the demised shop was one foot lower than the road in front of the shop and that many cracks had developed in the walls. Thus, the case of the landlords was that the demised shop was in dilapidated condition and had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation.

(3.) IN support of their case, the landlords examined PW1 Prem Chand, PW2 C.L. Sehgal, a building expert, and PW3 Kailash Chand. The landlords also placed on record report of the building expert as Ex.A1. On the other hand, the tenant examined himself as RW1, Raje Ram as RW2 and Lekh Raj, building expert, A.S. RW.3, and placed on record report of the building expert as Ex.RW.3/A.