VYAS DEV MISRA,C.J. - (1.)THIS revision is directed asainst the iudgmenl of Appellate Authority Simla, dismissing the landlord's petition for eviction of the tenant.
(2.)THE petitioner landlord is the owner of a building known as 'Charlie Mount'. It had eight sets. AD were rented out to the tenant. The respondent is occupying set No. 8.
On 22 3 0 1971 the landlord sent notice Ex. PX to the respondent that due to incessant rains the building had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and asked him to vacate the buildins and hand over is possession to the landlord. The respondent sent his reply Ex. D 1. He stated that the suite occupied by him was habitable, was in perfect good condition, and that the notice had been sent in order to make him agree to the enhanced rent demanded by the landlord. No further step was taken by the landlord and the matter stood closed.

(3.)AFTER a period of about two years the landlord sent notice Ex. P. W. 6/A dated 13th June, 1973, once again asking the respondent to vacate the building since it had become unsafe and unfit for human habitation and the landlord required the same bona fide for the purpose of building and rebuilding which could not be carried out unless the respondent vacated the suite in his possession. The respondent sent his reply Ex. D 2 dated 2nd July, 1973. It was stated that though the landlord had not been carrying out the annual repairs for the last so many years, the respondent at this own costs had been maintaining the premises.
;