RAJIVE BHALLA,J - (1.) CHALLENGE in this revision petition is to the orders dated 2.6.1999 and 27.11.2001 passed by the learned Rent Controller, as also the Appellate Authority, dismissing the rent petition, as also the appeal.
(2.) THE petitioner, filed a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, praying for ejectment of the respondent from a shop measuring 16'x 14'-3", on the grounds of non payment of rent, the tenanted premises have become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and that the respondent had replaced the main gate of the shop with a shutter, without the consent of the landlord, thus, impairing the value and utility of the tenanted premises. The petitioner landlord asserted that the respondent has failed to pay rent @ Rs. 40/- p.m. with municipal taxes @ Rs. 6/- p.m. from 1.4.1986. As regards the plea that the building has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation, it is averred that as the building is about 90 years old, the walls have developed cracks, the wooden battens have been consumed by termites, and as the building is in a dilapidated condition, it is therefore, unfit and unsafe for human habitation.
(3.) THE tenant contested the correctness of the aforementioned assertions but on the first date of hearing, tendered arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 4040/- @ Rs. 40/- p.m. with effect from 1.4.1986 to 31.8.1994, interest of Rs. 1060/- and costs as assessed by the Rent Controller of Rs. 200/-. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned Rent Controller framed the following issues :- "1. Whether the respondents are in arrears of rent ? OPA 2. Whether the premises in dispute has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and require reconstruction ? OPA 3. Whether the respondents without the consent of the petitioner had removed the main gate of the demised premises and affixed a shutter and in this way impaired the value and utility of the premises in dispute ? OPA 4. Relief. " ;