The Respondent immediately deposited the rent in Court and, therefore, the first ground did number survive.
The Appellant filed an Appeal which was allowed by an Order dated 26th May, 1989.
2002 Supp 4 SCR 9 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by N. VARIAVA, J. This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 14th March, 2000.
Hence this Appeal.
The Petition was companytested only on the ground of material alteration.
On 9th November, 1987 the Rent Controller rejected the ejectment Petition holding that the Appellant had number been able to prove that the Respondent had made any additions alterations.
The Rent Controller also held that the alterations were number of such a nature that they had impaired the value and utility of the shop.
The Appellant claimed that the shop had thus been materially impaired in value and utility.
The Appellate Court held that the additions alterations had been made by the Respondent tenant and that they materially impaired the value and utility of the shop.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The Appellant, who is a landlord of the companycerned premises, filed Eviction Petition on two grounds, namely, arrears of rent and secondly that there was material alteration in the shop without the written companysent of the landlord.
