- (1.) This revision petition has been filed against the judgment of the Appellate Authority, Hissar, dated June 15, 1974.
(2.) Briefly the facts are that the premises in dispute belonged to Nand Lal. He gave them on a monthly rent of Rs. 16 to Nand Kishore tenant. Later on, he sold them to Smt. Om Devi vide registered sale-deed dated June 11, 1971, for a consideration of Rs. 16,000/-. Smt. Om Devi brought an application for ejectment against Nand Kishore, inter alia on the ground that she required the premises in dispute for her personal use and occupation. The application was contested by the tenant. He stated that the landlady did not require the premises in dispute for her own use and occupation and that the same was a scheduled building. The other pleas taken by either of the parties are not relevant for the decision of this revision petition. The Rent Controller held that the premises in dispute is not a scheduled building and that the landlady required it for her own use and occupation. Consequently, it ordered ejectment of the tenant. He went up on appeal before the Appellate Authority who reversed the findings on both the matters and consequently dismissed the application for ejectment. The landlady has come up in revision against the judgment of the Appellate Authority to this Court.
(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the building in dispute is not a scheduled building and the Appellate Authority has erroneously reversed the finding of the Rent Controller. I have given a thought to the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner but do not find any force in it. RW 1 Rishi Kesh, Advocate stated that the respondent was a practising lawyer and had been using a part of the building as his office. The Rent Controller inspected the premises in dispute and had recorded a note. It is mentioned in it that in one of the rooms two small tables and a few chairs and some books were lying. There are no good reasons to disbelieve the statement of Rishi Kesh, Advocate. In view of the aforesaid facts, I affirm the findings of the Appellate Authority on this matter.;