H.S.BHALLA,J - (1.) HAVING lost battle before the Courts below, the petitioner- tenant has knocked at the door of this Court by filing the instant revision petition praying for acceptance of the same and setting aside the judgments passed by the Courts below recording concurrent findings therein on that point that khokha in question was held to be in dilapidated condition being unfit for human habitation thereby directing the tenant to hand over the vacant possession of the site in dispute to the landlord within a period of two months from the date of passing of the order.
(2.) THE facts required to be noticed for the disposal of this petition are that the respondent-landlord is owner of khokha and site underneath and the petitioner is tenant under him on payment of Rs. 50/- per month. The ejectment of the tenant has been sought inter alia on the grounds that the petitioner- tenant has not paid rent with effect from 1.5.1995 till the filing of the petition; that khokha in dispute is in dilapidated condition and is likely to collapse at any time and is unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The petitioner-tenant filed reply denying the pleas taken up by the landlord in his petition and raised a preliminary objection that the application is not maintainable and that the respondent-landlord has suppressed the material facts from the Court. On merits, relationship between the parties was admitted, but the remaining averments were denied, it has been pointed out that he had been regularly paying the rent to the landlord and now he is depositing the rent in the court in order to avoid ejectment with the condition to refund the same at the time of final disposal of the petition. It has been denied that khokha is in dilapidated condition. Finally, it has been prayed that the petition filed by the landlord be dismissed.
(3.) THE learned Rent Controller, after framing issues on the pleadings of the parties and evaluating the material available on the record, recorded a finding that the tenant is not in arrears of rent, but the landlord-respondent has succeeded in proving issue No. 2 that the demised premises is unfit and unsafe for human habitation and on this ground, the tenant has been directed to evict the demised premises within a period of two months from the date of passing of the order. Feeling aggrieved against the order passed by the Rent Controller, the tenant filed appeal before the lower appellate authority, which was dismissed vide order dated 30.7.2007, affirming the finding recorded by the Rent Controller.;