M.S.LIBERHAN,J - (1.) THE sole question raised in this revision petition is whether the building in dispute is unfit for human habitation or not. The trial Court after appraising the evidence led by the parties and keeping in view the inspection notes came to the conclusion that since the upper portion of the building in dispute has become unfit for human habitation, the respondent is liable to be ejected therefrom.
(2.) THE appellate authority without reversing the findings with respect to the building in dispute being unfit for human habitation, came to the conclusion that since the only plea taken in the ejectment petition is that the building has become unfit for human habitation on account of construction of an oven inside the shop, so no evidence can be looked into to prove the unfitness of the building for habitation being beyond pleadings. It was observed that the landlord has set up a new case during trial. The findings of the trial Court were set aside and it was held that the petitioner has failed to prove that the building has became unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this findings of the learned lower appellate Court with respect to absence of the plea regarding unfitness of the building for human habitation cannot be sustained. The approach of the learned lower appellate Court is alleged and in view of the evidence on the record, there is no propriety in the findings arrived at by the lower appellate authority. The learned counsel has further read out the petition for ejectment as well as the statement of PW3 Shamsher Singh as also his report Exhibit P2. He also placed reliance upon Sardarni Sampuran Kaur and another v. Sant Singh and another, 1983 PLR 449.
(3.) IT was held in the above quoted judgment that if the substantial portion of a particular building has become unsafe for human habitation, the tenant can be ejected from the premises forming part thereof under Section 13(1) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, despite the fact that particular portion in his occupation may not be so.;