M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This is tenants petition filed under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for brevity, the Act) challenging findings of facts recorded by the learned Appellate Authority, Sangrur in its judgment dated 10.10.1983. The learned Appellate Authority has relied upon the findings recorded by the Rent Controller on the issue as to whether the building has become unfit or unsafe for human habitation.

2. Brief facts of the case are that landlord respondent Chhabi Parkash filed an application under Section 13(3)(a)(iii) of the Act seeking ejectment of the tenant-petitioner, inter alia on the ground that the building has become unfit or.unsafe. The landlord respondent has examined an expert, namely, Shri Parshotam Singh, Sub Divisional Officer who has proved his report Ex.A1 and has opined that the building has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The aforementioned expert was not subjected to any cross examination at the instance of the tenant-petitioner. However, the Rent Controller himself visited the spot and recorded an inspection note. He concluded that although the construction is very old, yet the building appears to besou