RAM PARKASH Vs. KANWAL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's petition against whom eviction order has been passed by both the authorities below.

(2.) THE landlord Kanwal Kumar sought the ejectment of his tenant Ram Parkash who was inducted in the shop in dispute at a monthly rent of Rs. 70/- with effect from 1.1.1978, inter alia, on the ground that the tenant has ceased to occupy the demised premises without reasonable cause for a continuous period of more than four months. The stand taken by the tenant was that he never ceased to occupy the premises for a continuous period of more than four months as alleged. In fact his son Rajinder Kumar is suffering from mental disease since 1976, therefore, he had to attend him and he could not do his work regularly. In addition to this, he, that is the tenant, was also injured in the year 1979. Due to head injury he was unable to attend his work and open the shop regularly from April, 1979 till November, 1980. According to the tenant, the shop in dispute remained closed for a few days and not for more than four months continuously. He admitted that the electric connection was disconnected on 20th of June, 1983 but the same was done due to non-payment of the dues. The learned Rent Controller after going through the entire evidence came to the conclusion that the tenant closed the shop for a period of more than four months, that is, from 21.2.1979 to 26.12.1979 without reasonable cause. It view of this finding the eviction order was passed on 27.8.1982. In appeal the appellate authority affirmed the said finding of the learned Rent Controller with the observations that "I come to the conclusion that the appellant has failed to prove that he ceased to occupy the demised premises without reasonable cause. The finding of the learned Rent Controller on issue No. 2 does not call for any interference." Thus the eviction order was maintained.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant record.