HARNAM SINGH Vs. MANMOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment of learned Appellate Authority, Ludhina, under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act 1949, vide which the appeal of the petitioner against the order of his eviction by the learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana, from the demised premises was dismissed.

(2.) The respondent landlord approached the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, for the eviction of the petitioner from the premises situated in the city of Ludhiana, which had been rented out by him vide rent note dated April 5, 1965 at a monthly rent of Rs. 200/- for running rubber business. The condition was that the rent was to he paid in advance every month. The petitioner raised multifarious grounds for the eviction of the respondent including that the respondent was in arrears of rent from February 10, 1970, had made additions and alterations in the devised premises without his permission which had impaired the value and utility of the demised premises, that the respondent has sub-let the demised premises etc. In present petitioner in reply to the application contested the case of she respondent denying all the allegations. The learned Rent Controller tried the case on the following issues :

(3.) Shri H.L. Sarin, the learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the constructions made on the demised premises by the petitioner were such, which were necessary for the carrying on the business and these had not impaired the value and utility of the demised premises to bring the case within the ambit of Section 13 of the Punjab Act No. 3 of 1949. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the Appellate Authority made a concession on this point which has been recorded by the learned Appellate Authority in the following terms :