Sohan Lal vs Atma Singh

M.S. Liberhan, J.—The only question which is for consideration and was raised in this revision petition is whether the tenant had ceased to occupy the demised premises for the statutory period.

The landlord sought the ejectment of the tenant primarily on the grounds, that the tenant had ceased {o occupy the demised premises for the last more than a year; the demised premises were needed for personal occupation; the demised premises had been impaired in value and utility, and that the premises had become unsafe and unfit for human habitation.

The Rent Controller ordered the ejectment on the ground of personal necessity as well as on the ground that the tenant had ceased to occupy the demised premises for statutory period. The plea of impairment in value and utility and the premises being unsafe and unfit for human habitation was negatived by the Rent Controller.

The Appellate Authority reversed the finding with respect to the ground of personal necessity but maintained the order of ejectment by confirming the finding of the Rent Controller that the tenant had ceased to occupy the demised premises for the statutory period.

I have gone through the record and heard the learned counsel for the parties, in my considered view the findings arrived at by the Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority to the effect that the tenant had ceased to occupy the demised premises is unassailable. It was not disputed that the tenant had built a building in 1973 in shastri Nagar. An application (Ex A. 2) was preferred vide which a request vas made to the Postal Department to shift his telephone to the newly constructed premises as he has shifted there. The request was acceded to and the telephone was shifted. The tenant is a registered voter in Shastri Nagar where other members of his family are also registered as voters. Gian Singh (AW. 7) Meter Reader who has appeared in the witness box and has been believed by the authorities below stated to the effect that he visited the demised premises on a number of occasions from 11-2 1983. to 1 -1.2-1984 but the premises were found locked. It is not disputed that there was no consumption of electricity during the period from 12-2-1983 to 12-2-1984 but an attempt has been made to put forth an a explanation for non-consumption of electricity by putting an evidence to the effect that in 1986 the electric meter was found to be bunt.

Gian Singh Meter Reader was an independent witness. Nothing has been shown against him as to why he should depose falsely against the tenant Ha has been rightly believed No material has been pointed out to show that the view taken by the authorities could not have been taken Admittedly, the report of the meter having been burnt had come into existence much after the ejectment was sought. It was rightly observed that this is an evidence which have come into existence during the pendency of the proceedings and cannot be relied.

The fact of ceasing to occupy the demised premises is further corroborated by the facts that the telephone was admittedly shifted; the tenant registered as a voter at a different place having much more accommodation than the one which he was occupying as a tenant. This House is not more than 60 sq yard. In ordinary course of human conduct, the person having a mole-n living cannot be expected to live in dangy century old building of 60 sq. yards

For interference in the impugned order in exercise of revisional jurisdiction , jurisdiction, I find no impropriety or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Rent Authorities below.

In view of the observations, I find no force in this writ petition and the same is dismissed with no order as costs. However, the execution of the order of ejectment is stayed for two months subject to the condition of payment of arrears within one month as well as filing of an undertaking in this Court that the vacant possession shall be delivered to the landlord or his agent on or before the expiry of the time granted i.e. on or before 16-4-1990.