If a substantial part of the demised premises is being utilized for a purpose other than the one for which the same had been leased, the tenant would render himself liable to eviction.

Bal Raj Tuli, J.

1. Telu Ram petitioner purchased the shop in dispute from Jatinder Kishore by means of a sale deed dated November 9, 1964. He filed a petition for the ejectment of respondent Om Parkash Garg from the said shop on February 16, 1965. Om Parkash Garg had taken this shop on lease from Jatinder Kishore by means of a lease deed dated October 18, 1953, a copy of which is Exhibit A-1. The lease-deed was for a period of one year commencing from October 15, 1953 and ending on October 14, 1954. Clause 8 of the lease-deed stated as under :-

"I will use the shop mainly for the purpose of a general store." The shop has two chaubaras above it which constitute the first floor and the shop along with the chaubaras had been taken on lease by the respondent from Jatinder Kishore at a monthly rent of Rs. 37/-

2. The grounds, on which the application for ejectment was filed, were that the respondent had not paid rent and that he had installed a printing press in the shop without the consent of the landlord and thus altered. It is further alleged that by the setting up of the printing press the floors and the walls of the shop had been heavily damaged. In fact with the vibrations of the printing machine the entire building, had been damaged. The rent due along with interest and costs was paid on the first date of hearing and so, that ground of ejectment ceased to exist. The respondent submitted in his written statement that he had set up the printing press with the consent of the former landlord Jatinder Kishore and that no damage had been caused to the building or its floors or walls by the running of the printing press. The following issues were framed by the learned Rent Controller on the pleadings of the parties :

1. Whether the printing press was installed in the demised shop with the consent of the previous owner and the landlord of that shop ?

2. Whether the user of the rented premises for printing press has impaired the value of these premises and affords good ground for the ejectment of the respondent ?

3. Whether the printing press stands installed in only a small portion of the rented shop and to what effect ? The learned Rent Controller found that the printing press was installed in the demised premises without the written consent of the landlord, that its installation had not impaired materially the value or the utility of the demised premises and that the installation of the printing press in the back portion of the tenanted shop did not amount to conversion of the user of that shop. On these findings, the petition for ejectment was dismissed by order dated March 16, 1966.

3. The petitioner went up in appeal which was dismissed by the learned Appellate Authority (District Judge, Patiala) on December 21, 1966. The petitioner then filed the present revision petition in this Court under section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, III of 1949.

4. The only point that has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the dismissal of the ejectment application on the ground that by the installation of the printing press the purpose of letting had not been altered is not in accordance with law. It is further submitted that according to the evidence produced by the parties it is evident that the chaubaras on the first floor and the major portion of the shop on the ground floor are being used for the purposes of the printing press and only a small portion in the front of the shop is being used for keeping stationery and books for sale. My attention has been invited to the inspection note dated March 3, 1966 of the learned Rent Controller which is in these terms :

"I inspected the spot today in the presence of counsel for the parties. I found that the press has been fixed in the back portion covering less than 1/4th of the whole shop. The press is a small machine fixed on a wooden platform of 3-1/2 ft. x 2-1/2 ft. The remaining front portion of the shop is being used as a shop wherein almira