KANTA SAGAR Vs. VINOD KHANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by Smt. Kanta Sagar, hereinafter described as "the petitioner' directed against the judgment of the learned Appellate Authority, Jalandhar dated 24.12.1988. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the learned Appellate Authority had set aside the order of the learned Rent Controller and instead dismissed the petition for eviction.

(2.) The relevant facts are that Smt. Kanta Sagar had filed an eviction petition against respondents. The ground of non-payment of rent does not survive nor was pressed during the course of hearing. However, it was asserted that the respondents have made material additions and alterations in the property and the process had impaired the value an utility of the property. It was further asserted that the tenant had sublet the premises to one Devinder Kumar respondent No. 3 without the consent in writing of the petitioner.

(3.) The petition for eviction was not contested by Devinder Kumar respondent No. 3. However, the other respondents denied that the property had been sublet to Devinder Kumar without the consent in writing of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, Devinder Kumar is an employee of respondents No.1 and 2. He has been paid a salary of Rs. 950/- per month. As regards the contention of the respondents having materially impaired the value and utility of the property, the defence offered was the disputed shop is in the same condition as it was at the time of the inception of the tenancy.