MADAN LAL Vs. RAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners filed an application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short the Act) seeking ejectment of the respondent on various grounds, amongst others, that he had changed user of the premises in question. The application was contested by the respondent-tenant by filing a written statement alleging that the premises consisting of a shop had been taken on rent for carrying on business and the respondent-firm continued to carry on the business therein and there had been no change of user. It was specifically denied that no workshop had been set up in the shop in question.

(2.) THE parties led their evidence and on consideration thereof, learned Rent Controller by order dated June 9, 1978 dismissed the ejectment application as in his opinion the landlords had not been able to prove any of the grounds mentioned in the application. The appeal preferred by the petitioner-landlords was dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated September 18, 1989. The appellate authority affirmed the findings of the learned Rent Controller that the rate of rent of the demised premises was Rs. 650/- per annum and that there was no change of user of the premises in question.

(3.) THIS is a revision petition at the instance of petitioner-landlords. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners did not challenge the finding returned by the Courts below insofar as the rate of rent of the demised premises is concerned. The learned counsel, however, seriously challenged the finding regarding change of user.