1. The revision petitioners/ landlords filed R.C.P. No. 4 of 1992 under S.11(4)(ii) of Act 2 of 1965 for eviction of the respondents/ tenants. The Rent Control Court found that there was no landlord-tenant relationship and that the petitioners were not able to prove that there is alteration of the building so as to effect eviction under S.11(4)(ii). The Appellate Authority found that earlier in R.C.P. No. 187 of 1983 with regard to the same building, eviction was ordered on the ground of arrears of rent and that finding was not challenged. The landlord-tenant relationship was found in that case. Therefore, the Appellate Authority held that finding of the Rent Control Court that there is no landlord-tenant relationship cannot be accepted. We agree with the above finding of the Appellate Authority. However, with regard to the finding on the ground of S.11(2)(b), the Appellate Authority agreed with the Rent Control Court that alterations made by the tenants enhanced the value of the building and therefore, they cannot be evicted under S.11(4) (ii).

2. S.11(4)(ii) reads as follows:

"11. Eviction of tenants

(4) .................................

(ii) if the tenant uses the build