- (1.) The tenant is in revision against the order of the Appellate Authority, Amritsar dated 25.09.2010 by which order of the learned Rent Controller, Amritsar dated 26.08.2008 has been reversed and the tenant has been directed to vacate the demised premises within two months from the date of the order.
(2.) In brief, the landlord filed petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949for short ''the Act''. seeking eviction of the tenant from the demised premises bearing No.382/XIII-4, MCA, near Petrol Pump, M.M.Malviya Road, Amritsar which is in occupation of the tenant @ '100/- per month, inter alia, on the grounds of non-payment of arrears of rent, ceased to occupy continuously for a period of 4 months without reasonable cause w.e.f. June, 1990 by keeping the demised premises closed and locked and by his act and conduct the value and utility of the demised premises has materially impaired. In reply, the relationship of landlord and tenant and rate of rent were admitted. The arrears of rent were tendered and other averments made in the eviction petition were denied. The landlord filed the rejoinder and thereafter, the is-(sic) were framed. The learned Rent Controller (sic)missed the eviction petition holding that the landlord has failed to prove that the tenant has (sic)cased to occupy the demised premises and has impaired the value and utility of the demised premises, but in appeal, the learned Appellate Authority had found that the demised premises, which was let out for office, has been converted into a store for the purpose of storing salvage of the vehicles and other record of the Insurance Company/tenant. It was also found that the tenant has even disconnected the electricity connection and since the demised premises is locked most of the time, it is not getting enough air and sunlight which has caused impairment to its value and utility. Keeping in view the totality of facts, the eviction order was passed.
(3.) Learned counsel for the tenant has vehemently argued that landlord has failed to prove that the tenant is keeping the demised premises closed continuously for a period of 4 months without any sufficient cause as it has come on record that the demised premises is being opened intermittently whenever need arises for the purpose of storing salvage/record and it is being used generally for short period and hence there was no requirement to keep the electricity connection. It is, thus, argued that the learned Appellate Authority has committed a patent error of law in passing the order of eviction.;