J.V.GUPTA,J - (1.) THIS order will dispose of Civil Revision Nos. 3348 to 3354 of 1985, filed by Des Raj Jain landlord against his tenants, as the judgment is common in all these cases.
(2.) THE landlord, Des Raj Jain, sought the ejectment of his seven tenants by filing separate applications under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), inter alia on the ground that the shops in dispute in occupation of the tenants have become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. According to the landlord, the roofs of the building, including that the demised shops are made of wooden rafters and wooden planks which have been damaged by white ants. Some of the rafters have actually fallen down. There are so many depressions on the roofs of the building. The first floor of the building in question is in a dilapidated condition and the same has been kept vacant for more than twelve years because of its dilapidated condition and the same has been kept vacant for more than twelve years because of its dilapidated condition. The building as a whole including the demised shops is in a dilapidated condition and may fall at any time. Thus, the building is not safe and fit for human habitation. In the written statements, the tenants denied that the building is very old. On the other hand, it was claimed that the roofs of the demised shops, is A-Class and has a new lintel on it. There was absolutely no water leakage from the roofs and the question of its falling down does not arise. It was wrong that the whole building is unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The landlord is unnecessarily finding lame excuses to seek the eviction orders. Eviction cannot be sought on account of sufficiency of means or desire to reconstruct, as alleged. Since the landlord keeps the first floor portion locked and does into make necessary arrangements for even ordinary white washing and minor repairs, he by his intentional acts of negligence is not keeping the first floor in a condition in which he is bound to keep. He has sufficient accommodation on the first floor of the building for his settlement.
(3.) IN the replications filed by the landlord he claimed that the demised shops formed an integral part of the building and the building cannot be constructed unless and until the demised shops are demolished.;