Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

30- The legislature while incorporating this ground intended that only those constructions which brought about a substantial change in the front and structure of the building that would provide a ground for the tenants eviction and hence it had taken care to use the words "materially altered the accommodation".

31- In Charan Singh v. Ananthi 1966 (68) PLR 780 it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that it is not every act of waste, which entitles the landlord to ask for eviction, but it is only that act of waste, which causes substantial damage to the premises. The onus is upon the landlord to prove that tenant has caused substantial damage to the premises. He has not only to prove that the tenant has caused damage to the property but also to prove that such act has caused substantial damage to the property.

(iii) Tenant has made the construction without the consent of the landlord;
(iv) The said construction has materially effected the tenancy premises and further that the construction which had been carried out by the tenant had material altered the premises;
(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 (RCT Appeal No.10/2011 & 13/2011) (Page 26 of
35) 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 alterations and structural changes in the tenancy premises which had brought about material impairment in the value and utility of premises.

35) accommodation, having regard to the purpose for which the accommodation may have been let out to the tenant. The legislature intended that only those constructions, which bring about substantial change in the front and structure of the building should provide a ground for tenant's eviction, it took care to use the words, "materially altered the accommodation". The material alterations contemplate change of substantial nature affecting the form and character of the building. Many a time tenants make minor constructions and alterations for the convenient use of the tenanted accommodation. The legislature does not provide for their eviction instead the construction so made would furnish ground for eviction only when they bring about substantial change in the front and structure of the building. Construction of a chabutra, almirah, opening a window or closing a verandah by temporary structure or replacing of a damaged roof which may be leaking or placing partition in a room or making similar minor alterations for the convenient use of the accommodation do not materially alter the building as in spite of such construction the front and structure of the building may remain uneffected. The essential element which needs consideration is as to whether the constructions are substantial in nature and they alter the form, front and structure of the accommodation."