- (1.) The aforementioned two civil revision petitions filed by the tenants are directed against orders dated 19.8.2006 of the Rent Controller and of 19.8.2011 of the Appellate Authority respectively under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter mentioned as the Act) whereby these were found to be cases of material impairment in value and utility of the premises, which had made the petitioners-tenants liable for eviction.
(2.) As the matter in issue involved in both the petitions is the same, the same are being taken up together for adjudication.
(3.) However, for convenience and clarity, facts have been taken from CR No.6522 of 2011. Challenging both the impugned orders, the tenant has claimed that the courts below failed to take note of the fact that the material impairment in value and utility of the premises had been made by the landlord himself before the tenant had been inducted in the premises pursuant to rent note of 23.2.1994. It is further claimed by the tenant that neither any addition nor alteration was made by her nor it was by any one at her instance and further that no case for her eviction was made out. In short, it is urged that all the alterations pointed out were made by the landlord himself to make the premises more useable.;