ambiguity in the admission, it would be necessary for the court to read the other part of the evidence and stand taken by him in the pleadings. According to the Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioners, the sentences wherein the tenant has admitted as correct the fact that tenancy premises is in dilapidated condition has been typed wrongly, and thus, on the basis of such kind of admission the findings against the petitioner cannot be recorded to the effect that the building has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and is in dilapidated condition. Counsel for the petitioner has further argued that no such finding with regard to dilapidated condition of the building in question could have been given by the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority in a petition filed under section 12 of the Act, by the tenant, as the issue before the authorities below in the instant petition was only to the extent of granting permission to the tenant to make necessary repairs in the demised premises as prayed, and as such, on this ground the revision petition is liable to be accepted.
