VED PARKASH KALIA Vs. ANJANA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment, dated 25.03.2013, passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Fast Track Court, Una, H.P., in Rent Appeal No. 35/2010. Key facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that the respondent -landlord (hereinafter referred to as 'the landlord' for the sake of convenience) had filed a petition against the appellant -tenant (hereinafter referred to as 'the tenant' for the sake of convenience. The shop was rented out to the tenant in the month of January, 1992 on payment of rent @ Rs. 500/ - per month. The tenant has not paid rent of the premises from January, 1996. The tenant has met with an accident and on humanitarian grounds, Amrit Lal, husband of the landlord rented out the premises to the tenant for running a tea stall. Two rooms of the shop in back side were completely damaged and the roof was likely to fall. The balas supporting the roof were completely rotten. The tenant has shifted his tea stall near PWD Executive Engineer Office, Una about 8 years back. He has changed the rotten roof with tin. He has changed the shop into his residence. He was living there with his wife and children. He has constructed the toilet in the premises. The shop in dispute was in existence for the last 100 years. The walls have outlived their life. The structure has become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. It was in dilapidated condition. It was bonafidely required by the landlord for building re -building and the same cannot be done without the shop being vacated. The acts of the tenant were likely to impaired the material value and utility of the shop.

(2.) THE petition was contested by the tenant. According to the tenant, he was still working in the disputed shop. He has not converted the shop into his residence. The rent of the shop was Rs. 30/ - per month. He was inducted as tenant by the husband of the landlord. He has paid rent up to 1996 @ Rs. 30/ - per month. It is denied that he has shifted his tea stall near PWD office. The condition of the building is fit for human habitation as it was in good condition.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved by the order, dated 25.11.2010, passed by the learned Rent Controller, Court No. III, Una, District Una, H.P., the tenant filed an appeal before the learned Appellate Authority, Fast Track Court, Una, H.P. The same was dismissed on 25.03.2013. Hence this petition.