Ajay Tewari, J.

1. CM No. 11025-C of 2009 For the reasons recorded in the application, the same is allowed. The deficiency of Court fee in filing the present appeal is made good.

RSA No. 3588 of 2009 (O&M)

2. This appeal has been filed against the concurrent judgments of the Courts below decreeing the suit of the respondent for eviction of the appellant from the premises in dispute.

The following questions have been proposed :-

i) Whether failure to frame material issues which goes to root of the matter and especially which ousted the jurisdiction of the civil Courts prejudicially affect the appellant ?

ii) Whether failure to consider the documentary evidence by both the learned Courts is legal and valid in view of the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in AIR 2002 Supreme Court 2849 and in 2002(3) Civil Court Cases 680 (SC) ?

iii) Whether the Courts below have rightly interpreted Section 2(j) of EPURR Act on the basis of wrong interpretation of decision in Gian Chand v. Parkash Chand and ors., 1981(1) Rent Control Reporter 532 (P&H) ?

iv) Whether admission of the respondent No. 1 (plaintiff) admitting the premises as Karkhana could be ignored by the Courts below ?

v