GOPI CHAND Vs. VIR BHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The demised shop consisted of three rooms and an upper storey room. The undenied facts are that the upper storey room has come down and before it actually came down the local municipality served a notice on the landlord for its demolition. The two back rooms of the shop have also come down. But there is a controversy that the same can be repaired to the order of the Rent Controller there is a reference to his inspection of the site and he was of the opinion that the back rooms could be repaired, but the Appellate Authority points out that no inspection-note was found on the record and a brief note with regard to the inspection by the Rent Controller was found on another file. The authorities below have also differed on the appraisal of the evidence. While the Rent Controller was of the opinion that the demised shop or at least the front part of it in which the tenant carries on his business was not proved by the landlord to be unfit and unsafe for human habitation, the Appellate Authority after review of the whole of the evidence came to an entirely different conclusion. It is admitted by even the two witnesses of the tenant that the back portion of the shop has come down.

(2.) It is in these facts and circumstances that the Appellate Authority ordered eviction of the tenant on the ground that the demised shop was unfit and unsafe for human habitation and the landlord requires the same for reconstruction.

(3.) The learned counsel for the tenant urges that not only the inspection that was made by the Rent Controller ran contrary to the findings of the Appellate Authority, but the notice given by the local municipality for pulling down was only confined to the upper storey room, and the evidence indicated that while the front part of the shop was in good condition, and not the back, the back part of the shop could have been required. It, however, appears from the evidence of the witnesses of both the parties that if the back two rooms of the shop ate to be brought to any shape so that the same can be occupied, extensive repairs would be necessary. The substance of the matter is that the upper storey room has come down and the back rooms are practically gone. In these circumstances, the landlord is not to wait until every single particle of the building let crumbles to the ground. A good part of the building has really already gone and, in the circumstances, the tenant cannot campel the landlord to continue him in a portion of the demised shop in which he can carry on some small business.