KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. - (1.) FOR the reasons stated in the application, delay in refiling the appeal is condoned.
(2.) PETITIONERS Vijay Gupta, Shiv Kumar Gupta, Arvind Kumar Gupta, Sudhir Kumar Gupta and Ashwani Kumar Gupta are legal representatives of Om Parkash Gupta. They are stated to be residents of SCF No. 5, Sector 27-D, Chandigarh. They are aggrieved against the order passed by the Appellate Authority, Ambala which had reversed the order of ejectment passed by the Rent Controller, Ambala Cantt. Om Parkash Gupta had preferred an eviction petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 seeking ejectment of respondent Lila Devi from the demised premises bearing House No. 4060, Hill Road, Ambala Cantt. The demised premises consist of two rooms. It was rented out to the respondent at a monthly rent of Rs. 89/- besides taxes. Subsequently, on 5.3.1992 fair rent was assessed by the Rent Controller, Ambala Cantt. It was pleaded in the rent petition that the tenant was in arrears of rent from 1.3.1993 onwards. Difference in the fair rent from 5.3.1992 to 28.2.1993 was calculated at the rate of Rs. 180/- and rent from 1.3.1993 to 31.7.1994 was calculated at Rs. 1513/-. The amount of tax was Rs. 85/- and it was pleaded that tenant was in arrears of rent of Rs. 1,778/-. Second ground taken in the eviction petition was that the tenant had made material alterations in the premises and has converted the verandah into room. It was stated that the wooden door had been removed and iron shutter had been installed and thereby the respondent had impaired the value and utility of the demised premises.
(3.) WRITTEN statement was filed on behalf of the tenant denying the ground that the material alterations have been made. It was stated that it was wrong that the verandah has been converted into room. It was stated that the wooden door was intact and that it was at the same place where it was originally fixed. However, it was stated that the respondent had affixed shutter on the thara and this thara was also covered with the roof and two side walls. In the replication, assertion of the tenant was disputed and that of the rent application was reiterated.;