( 1 ) RESPONDENT had sued for eviction U/s 14 (1) (h) etc. Defence was that allotment was temporary and that is was a case of partial eviction as latrine in tenants occupation had been included. Landlord s case was that its user was not exclusive but comman. Tenant relied on some receipts in which latrine was mentioned. In 2nd appeal, it was held that for terms of tenancy Statement in rent receipt is not enough and more cogent proof was necessary. Para 6 onwards judgment is

( 2 ) IT was next contended that the allotment of a Government accommodation in favour of the appellant could not constitute a ground of eviction under Section H (1) (h) of the Act because the allotment was of a temporary nature intended to enable the appellant to have effective treatment of his son in the Safdarjang Hospital. Reliance for this contention was placed on Ex. Rl, which mentions that the accommodation in question had been sanctioned "on ad hoc basis on the ground of sickness of your son". Learned counsel for the appellant was, however, unable to show either with reference to the allotment rules or otherwise that such ad hoc allotment was intended to be a temporary arrangement. The dictio