HARGOPAL Vs. HEM RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the dismissal of his petition filed under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (for short the Act) seeking eviction of Hem Raj respondent from the premises in dispute. The petitioner sought eviction on the ground of sub-letting and that the building has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation.

(2.) THE case set up by the petitioner was that the property in dispute was leased out to Balwant Rai at a monthly rent of Rs. 43/- for one year from 1.4.1976 to 31.3.1977. Rent Note was executed by Balwant Rai in favour of Thakar Dass on 29.6.1976. Balwant Rai died on 12.5.1983 leaving behind no legal heir.

(3.) THE application was contested on the ground that the respondent was real brother of Balwant Rai now deceased. He has succeeded to Balwant Rai and as such has become a tenant under the applicant. The factum of shop having been taken on rent by Balwant Rai, father of Hem Raj applicant at the rate of Rs. 43/- per month was admitted. Rent claimed was paid on the first date of hearing. The allegations that the value and utility of the building has been impaired was also denied. It was also denied that building was unfit and unsafe for human habitation.