BIMLA GOEL Vs. SATPAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 5.3.2010 of the learned Appellate Authority rendered in Rent Appeal No. 62 -S/14 of 2009.

(2.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the respondent -landlord (hereinafter referred to as 'landlord ' for convenience sake) filed a petition, under section 14 of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 against the petitioners -tenants (hereinafter referred to as 'tenants ' for convenience sake). Landlord is owner of building No.31, Alley No.7, Middle Bazaar, Shimla. The tenants are in accommodation of three rooms, one bath room and one verandah in the first floor on annual rent of Rs.4,800/ -. The eviction of the tenants has been sought on the ground that the suit premises has become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. It has outlived its life, material used has decayed, cracks have appeared in the walls, floors have sagged and the entire building is in a dilapidated condition. The building is made of Dhajji walls and wooden frame structure. The building was inspected by the expert. The tenants have been requested several times to vacate the premises but in vain. The eviction has also been sought on the ground that the entire building, including premises under tenancy and occupancy of the tenants is bona fide required by the landlord for the purpose of building/rebuilding, which could not be carried out without the same being vacated by the tenants. The entire building was required to be pulled down to raise RCC structure. The building is situated in commercial area. The landlord has sufficient funds to raise construction. The eviction has also been sought on the grounds that the tenants have changed the user of the premises from residential to non -residential without the consent of the landlord. The tenants have started storing raw material. 16/5/2014 Page 4 Equivalent Citation:2011 -JX(HP) -0 -2052

(3.) REJOINDER was filed by the landlord. Issues were framed by the Rent Controller on 19.3.2008. Rent Controller ordered the eviction of the tenants on the ground that the suit premises in possession of the tenants have become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. The eviction of the tenants was also ordered on the ground that the suit premises were bona fide required by the landlord for building/rebuilding, which could not be carried out without getting the premises vacated by the tenants The tenants were directed to handover vacant possession of the suit premises to the landlord forthwith. Rent Controller has rejected the case of the landlord as far as eviction was sought on the ground that the tenants have changed the user of the premises from residential to non -residential. The tenants feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Rent Controller filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, Fast Track Court, Shimla. The Appellate Authority rejected the same on 5.3.2010. Hence, the present revision petition.