CR No.2508 of 2008 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2508 of 2008 (O & M) Date of decision 28.11.2008. Krishan Lal Bitu .....Appellant versus Rajni Sharma .....Respondent Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia. Present: Mr. Sudhir Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S. C. Kapoor, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S. S. Dalal, Advocate for the respondent. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. Petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 seeking eviction of the petitioner-tenant was filed on the ground that shop No.65/1 and 65/2, Village Attawa, UT, Chandigarh had become unfit for human habitation. It was also pleaded therein that arrears of rent have not been paid. A written statement was filed by the counsel for the respondent wherein the rate of rent Rs.2800/- was disputed and it was stated that the rent was Rs.200/- and the same was increased to Rs.250/- for each Shop, so far as tenant has been paying rent at the rate of Rs.500/- of two shops. After completion of the pleadings, Rent Controller formulated the following issues: 1) Whether the rate of rent is Rs.2800/- per month and not Rs.500/- per month for both the shops in dispute? OPP 2) Whether the petitioner is entitled for eviction of the respondent from Shop No.65/1 and 65/2 Village Attawa, Chandigarh on the ground respondent being in arrears of rent since 1.7.2001? OPP CR No.2508 of 2008 (O & M) 2 3) Whether the respondent is also liable to be evicted from the demised premises as premises has become unfit for human habitation? OPP 5) Whether the suit is frivolous and as such liable to be dismissed? OPR 6) Relief Relying upon the report of the Local Commissioner that tenant has also damaged the demised shops, Rent Controller held that from evidence it is proved that the shops had collapsed and there is only Malba, lying there. Landlord stated that the collapsed shops are still under the lock and key of the tenant. PW-1 Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Sectional Officer from office of the Executive Engineer who was appointed as a Local Commissioner, in the previous civil suit, proved his report Ex. P-1 giving details of the bad shape and dilapidated condition of the demised shops. Factum of collapsed buildings was also proved on the record, relying upon that it was held that the demised shops are unfit and unsafe for human habitation. Aggrieved against the same, the appeal was filed in the appellate Court. The appellate Court examined the evidence and concurred with the findings arrived by the Rent Controller. Sh. Sudhir Sharma, appearing for the petitioner-tenant stated that earlier civil suit was filed by the petitioner-tenant for permanent injunction and a written statement was filed in the same. It was stated in the written statement that most part of the building has already collapsed. It was also stated therein that in case property is vacated by the tenant-landlord to construct new premises, two shops can be provided to the tenant. Sh. Kapoor appearing for the landlord stated that suit has been CR No.2508 of 2008 (O & M) 3 disposed off, therefore, no reliance can be placed upon the concession made in the written statement as proposal made by the landlord was turned down by the tenant. The photographs as proved before the Rent Controller have also been shown to me. It is evident that the two Courts below while examining the evidence have also taken into consideration the visual effect of the photographs. Therefore, no interference is called for. The revision petitioner is dismissed. At this stage Sh. Sharma has stated that reasonable time be given. This request has been seriously opposed, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been carrying his business since long, three months time is granted to the tenant to vacate the demised premises. Disposed of. 28.11.2008 (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) A.Kaundal JUDGE