Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: structural changes in Through Its Partner Shri Yogesh Puri vs Shri Nand Lal Virmani on 29 January, 2020Matching Fragments
2.2 After being inducted as tenant in the demised premises, the appellant caused substantial damage, structural changes and unauthorized construction without written consent of father of the present respondents thereby materially impairing its value and utility.
2.3 The appellant demolished the latrine, which was for common use of the appellant with two other occupants namely Shri Champat Ram and Shri Raghubir Singh of the property; the appellant illegally extended the demised premises by covering the verandah and courtyard, converting the same into a big hall; the appellant broke wall depicted in the site plan as AD and installed a shutter at points depicted in the site plan as YY1 at rear side of the demised premises close to the tin sheeted WC belonging to Shri Champat Lal adjoining the demised premises; the appellant also fixed a shutter at points depicted in the site plan as ZZ1 on front side of the demised premises subsequent to 16.07.1999; the appellant also raised height of the walls and after removing roof of the demised room, constructed a parchhatti (mezzanine floor); the appellant fixed more than six girders in the wall of the demised premises and caused damage.
RCT No. 30342/2016 M/s Alpha Agencies vs Nand Lal Virmani Page 3 of 21 pages 2.4 Since the above mentioned structural changes and damage caused to the demised premises was carried out without written consent of the landlord Shri Basant Lal or the present respondents, and the same caused material impairment to the utility and value of the demised premises, the appellant is liable to be evicted under Section 14(1)(j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, according to the present respondents.
3.4 The appellant did not carryout any damage or structural changes or construction in the demised premises as alleged by the present respondents without consent of Shri Basant Lal. The demised premises continue to be in the same and similar condition as the same were at the time of induction of the appellant as a tenant, and the appellant merely renovated the demised premises, that too with the specific permission and written consent of Shri Basant Lal who had agreed to even reimburse the amount spent on renovation.
v) court must determine the nature, character of the construction and the extent to which they make changes in the structure of the premises having regard to the purpose for which the premises have been let out.
vi) landlord has to prove it by cogent evidence and wherever necessary expert witness should be examined.
vii) an eviction order under clause (j) could be passed if the tenant has carried out such additions or RCT No. 30342/2016 M/s Alpha Agencies vs Nand Lal Virmani Page 9 of 21 pages alternations and structural changes in the tenancy premises which had brought about material impairment in the value and utility of premises.