IMPORTANT POINT
For eviction u/s 13(3)(a) of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 landlord need not be the owner of the premises. He must be person u/s 2(c) of the Act defining landlord to be a person who is for the time being entitled to receive rent of the premises as an agent of the landlord.

ORDER

This appeal, by special leave, is from the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in C.R. No. 3791 of 1998 dated April 6, 1999.

2. The appellant is the tenant of Suit Premises No. 2235, 1st Floor, Sector 21-C, Chandigarh (for short, the Premises ) of which one Bhakhtawar Singh was said to be the owner. The father of the respondent, Bagicha Singh, inducted the appellant into possession of the premises in 1965. The respondent was paying rent to him till his death in 1976. Thereafter, the appellant has been paying the rent to the respondent. On the ground that he required the premises for his own occupation the respondent filed Rent Application No. 231/1996 under Section 13(3)(a) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short, the Act ). The appellant denied that the relationship between him and the respondent was that of the tenant and the landlord and further denied that the respondent required the premises for his personal occupation.

3. On considering the evidence produced by both the sides, the learned Rent Controller found that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the respondent and the appellant; it was also found that the respondent satisfied the requirement of clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 13 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned Rent Controller ordered eviction of the appellant on September 25, 1997. He unsuccessfully challenged that order before the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, who dismissed the appeal on July 27, 1998. The appellant then carried the matter before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana by filing Civil Revision No. 3791 of 1998 which was dismissed on April 6, 1999. It is the validity of that order that is challenged in this appeal.

4. Mr. O.P. Sharma the learned senior counsel for the appellant, has vehemently contended that having regard to the definition of the term landlord in clause (c) of Section 2 of the Act, the respondent cannot be treated as landlord; he laid emphasis on the words "every person from time to time deriving title under a landlord" and argued that no document has been filed and no material was placed before the Court to show that the respondent derived his title from the heir of the owner of the premises after his death. Therefore, he could not be treated as a landlord for purposes of Section 13(3)(a) of the Act.

5. Mr. A. Mariarputham, the learned counsel for the respondent, submitted that the Act maintained distinction between an owner of a premises and a landlord of the premises; for purposes of Section 13(3)(a), what is required to be seen is whether the person seeking eviction satisfies the requirement of the definition of landlord and, therefore, all the courts rightly held that the respondent was the landlord and ordered eviction of the appellant.

6. The short question that arises for our consideration is, what is the import of the word landlord in clause (c) of Section 2 of the Act?, and whether the respondent has rightly been held to be the landlord and entitled to seek eviction of the appellant.

7. The said provisions reads as follows :

"Section 2(c) : `landlord means any person for the time being entitled to receive rent in respect of any building or rented land whether on his own account or on behalf, or for the benefit of any other person, or as a trustee, guardian, receiver, executor or administrator for any other person, and includes a tenant who sublets any building or rented land in the manner hereinafter authorised, and, every person from time to time deriving title under a landlord."

8. A perusal of the provision, quoted above, shows that the following categories of persons fall within the meaning of landlord : (1) any person for the time being entitled to receive rent in respect of any building or rented land; (2) a trustee, guardian, receiver, executor or administrator for any other person; (3) a tenant who sublets any building or rented land in the manner authorised under the Act and (4)