A landlord can evict a tenant who has ceased to occupy the premises for a continuous period of 12 months without reasonable cause.

Bhawani Singh, J.—Tenant, Joginder Nath Sood, has a grievance against the judgment of the appellate authority (Rent Act) in Civil Misc. 46-S/14 of 1984 Appeal No.whereby the appeal of the landlord, Jagat 5-S/14 of 1985 Ram Sood, has been allowed and order of eviction, from the demised premises, has been passed with a direction to the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the premises within a period of one month from the date of the order, thus, giving cause to the tenant to move this Court by way of this petition under section 21 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, praying for the annulment of the impugned judgment and dismissal of the eviction petition initiated by the landlord.

2. The necessary facts of this case are that the tenant is in occupation of accommodation consisting of one room and a kitchen, on the first floor of the building known as Shesh Mahal, Lower Lakkar Bazar, Simla. The landlord moved a petition under section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1971, seeking eviction of the tenant complaining that the tenant has ceased to occupy the tenanted premises for a continuous period of 12 months without reasonable cause. The tenant protested the allegation and stated, inter aha, that he never ceased to occupy the premises in dispute or that he has shifted to some building known as Butail Building. Further more, it has been stated that his occupation of the premises in dispute is continuous and the landlord has failed to mention the material particulars in the petition, as are essentially required in accordance with law.

3. On the pleadings of the parties, the Rent Controller, proceeded to frame the following issues : "1. Whether the respondent has ceased to occupy the building for continuous 12 months without reasonable cause, as alleged ? OPP

2. Whether the petition lacks, material particulars, as alleged, in para 1 of the preliminary objection ? OPR

3. Whether the respondent is entitled to special costs as alleged in para 2 of the preliminary objection ?

4. Whether the petitioner is barred by his acts, conducts and deeds to file this application ? OPR.

5. Relief."

4. The contest ended in the dismissal of the eviction petition after the Rent Controller decided issue No 1 against the landlord and since other issues were not material to the ultimate fate of the petition, the decision thereon in favour of the landlord, as done by the Rent Controller, did not make any difference. The decision was assailed by the landlord before the appellate authority which differed with the findings of the Rent Controller on issue No. 1 and held the same as proved against the tenant. The result was that the eviction of the tenant has been ordered. This is bow the matter has come in this Court.

5. Shri Chhabil Dass, who appears for the tenant, has very ably and strenuously assailed the findings of the appellate authority and he contends that the appellate authority has gravely erred in coming to the conclusion that the tenant has ceased to occupy the premises in question ; rather, Shri Chhabil Dass points out that the evidence on the record is so clear and conclusive that such a finding cannot, at all, be arrived at. There is gross miscarriage of justice, besides, the palpable error in the decision of this case, Shri Chhabil Dass argues, and appeals for setting-aside the judgment after perusing the evidence on the record of this case. These submissions have been contested by Shri Laxmi Chand Sood, Counsel for the landlord. He contends that the findings of the Rent Controller were quite erroneous and divorced from the evidence on record, so, they were rightly up-set by the appellate authority. Shri Laxmi Chand Sood further submits that the impugned judgment is strictly in accordance with law and evidence on record, therefore, does not call for any interference at the revisional stage.

6. The fundamental question to be examined in this case is whether the tenant has ceased to occupy the premises in ques