LAKH RAM Vs. BABU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision petition, the tenant has challenged the judgment of Appellate Authority (I), Shimla, in C.M.A. No. 125-S/ 14 of 1988 decided on 28-3-1989 thereby affirming the order of the Rent Controller dated 12-8-1988 in Case No. 70/2 of 1986.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that the tenant occupies premises consisting of two rooms and one store of the building known as Pen Rose Lodge, Kasumpti, a suburb of Shimla. The landlord moved this petition under S. 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1971 on grounds, inter alia, that the tenant had failed to pay the rent from 1-81982 to 30-9-1986 despite repeated demands and notices and that the building was very old and had outlived its life and was in a dilapidated condition and thus had become unsafe and unfit for human habitation. It is just like a village house without any modern facilities and the petitioner had purchased the building with a purpose to demolish the same and reconstruct a building of modern style after providing all modern factilities and the same cannot be done without the tenant vacating the same. It has also been stated that the plan for the new building has already been sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation and other authorities and the estimated cost was to be raised and the landlord had the funds to spend for the purpose. A ground that the premises had been sub-let without the consent of the landlord after the commencement of the Act has also been taken. On the to her hand the tenant has opposed the petition on the grounds like non-maintainability, locus-standi of the petitioner to file the same, want of cause of action and that the buildings in good condition and did not require any demolition. It has also been denied that the same has been sub-let to anyone.

(3.) The Rent Controller framed the following issued on the pleadings of the parties: