BISHAN DASS Vs. SADHU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts briefly are :- The petitioner filed an application under Sections 10 and 12 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter called the Act) for permission to repair one portion of the back wall of the demised shop. It was alleged that the same had been demolished at the instance of the landlord; thus, necessitating its repair. The respondent/landlord in his reply, inter alia, pleaded that the demised shop was in a dilapidated condition and it required reconstruction. The learned Rent Controller on August 24, 1988, passed the following order :-

(2.) IT has come on record that the petitioner/tenant has effected necessary repairs.

(3.) MR . Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the orders of the Rent Controller permitting the tenant to carry out necessary repairs was not appealable. In support of his submission, he relied on M/s. Daya Chand Hardyal v. Bir Chand, reported as AIR 1983 Punjab and Haryana 356.