SHAKUNTLA RANI Vs. JAGDISH PARSHAD

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The landlord sought ejectment of the tenant from the demised shop inter alia on the ground that the tenant has made material alteration and construction in the shop in dispute, without the prior consent of the landlord acid it has, thus, materially impaired its value and utility. According to the landlord, the tenant damaged the existing pillars and constructed new ones and also constructed a hanging projection there.

(3.) On trial, the learned Rent Controller found that the landlord has failed to prove that the tenant has impaired the value and utility of the demised premises, as alleged. As a matter of fact, the main dispute between the parties was with respect to the rate of rent. According to the landlord, the rent was Rs. 120/- p.m. whereas according to the tenant, it was Rs. 12/- p.m. ultimately, it was found that the rate of rent was Rs. 12/- p.m. Consequently, the ejectment application was dismissed. In appeal, the learned Appellate Authority affirmed the said findings of the Rent Controller and thus, maintained the order dismissing the ejectment application.