RAGHUNATH Vs. RAGHBIR DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by Raghunath (hereinafter described as the petitioner) directed against the judgment of the Appellate Authority, Amritsar dated September 22, 1981. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the learned Appellate Authority had set aside the order passed by the learned Rent Controller. Instead, an order of eviction was passed against the petitioner granting him a month's time to vacate the property.

(2.) The relevant facts are that respondent Raghbir Dass Bawa filed a petition for eviction against the petitioner with respect to the demised premises. The sole surviving ground with which the present revision petition is concerned is that the demised property has become unfit arid unsafe for human habitation. The petition for eviction was contested. It was denied by the petitioner that the demised premises has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The learned Rent Controller framed the issues and qua the dispute, if the property has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation, the findings were adverse to the respondent-landlord. The respondent had preferred an appeal. The Appellate Authority had set aside the findings of the learned Rent Controller, and hence the present revision petition.

(3.) There is no controversy between the parties that the suit premises is an old structure. The case of the petitioner is that it is fit and safe for human habitation. He denied that it is in dilapidated condition. As pointed above, the Appellate Authority had returned the finding of fact that property in question is unfit and unsafe for human habitation. This Court while exercising its power under Sub Section (5) to Section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act') would only interfere if the findings are not based on evidence or contrary to law or are absurd.