The judgment established the importance of documentary evidence in determining ownership and NRI status, the presumption of genuineness in an NRI landlord's need for eviction, and the competence of filing eviction petitions through a Power of Attorney.

Vinod K.Sharma, J.

1. Present revision petition is directed against the order of eviction passed under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short the Act).

2. The respondent-landlord is residing in Canada and sought eviction of the petitioner herein from Kothi No. 210 min, situated at Old Jail Road, Amritsar.

3. On notice having been issued the petitioner filed an application for leave to defend. The ground on which leave to defend was sought is that the petitioner was neither NRI nor owner of the property and therefore, was not competent to maintain the petition. Second ground on which leave to defend was sought was that the claim framed is with mala fide intention as on an earlier occasion also the landlord had claimed the petitioner to be a licencee and the said matter was contested in the civil court. The plea was also taken that Sarabjit Singh was not validly constituted attorney whereas he was an intending purchaser. The personal need was also denied. Besides these, other general grounds were also taken. However, the application moved by the petitioner was rejected by the learned Rent Controller by observing as under:

"6. In order to seek leave to defend the present petition, the Ltd. Counsel for the respondent has made certain contentions. The first contention raised by Ld. Counsel for respondent is that the petitioner is not the owner of the property. Applicant has produced on file copy of sale deed dated 17.1.80. Perusal of which shows that Satish Kumar son of Chuni Lal has purchased the property from Janak Raj. Applicant has further produced copy of sale deed dated 16.6.81. Perusal of this sale deed shows that Satish Kumar s/o Chuni Lal has sold the property to Malwinder Kaur petitioner. Applicant has further produced sale deed dated 17.2.1994. Perusal of this sale deed shows that applicant Malwinder Kaur has purchased the property from Manmohan Singh, Amarbir Singh sons of Gurdeep Singh, Harjit Singh, Ranjit Singh sons of Narinder Singh, Sukh Raj Singh s/o Gurbax Singh, Smt. Sukhbir Kaur widow of Prithipal Singh, Sarniamat Singh, Damanjit Singh sons of Prithipal Singh, Navneet Kaur daughter of Prithipal Singh, Smt. Narinder Kaur, Amarjit Kaur, Malwinder Kaur daughter of Shivdyal Singh, Kanwaljit Singh s/o Amolak Singh, Sawinder Kaur widow of Amolak Singh, Baldev Singh s/o Mula Singh, Ranjit Kaur, Jagjit Kaur, Manjit Kaur, Lakhbir Kaur Navneet Kaur daughters of Joginder Singh, Gurbachan Kaur daughter of Joginder Singh, petitioner Malwinder Kaur has also purchased the property vide sale deed dated 17.3.94 from the above stated persons. Applicant has further placed on file record of House Tax Department to prove her ownership. Even the applicant has produced the certified copy of the judgment passed in Civil Suit No. 47/95 titled as Sita Ram v. Malwinder Kaur decided on 8.4.06 by the court of Sh. Daljit Singh Ralhan, CJDD, Amritsar wherein there is a finding that Malwinder Kaur is owner of the property. In the judgment reference has been made regarding statement of Sita Ram present applicant who was examined as PW10 in that case. While appearing as PW10, he has admitted that he took the property on rent from Malwinder Kaur admitting Malwinder Kaur as owner and landlady. From the above facts, it is clear that the petitioner is owner of the demised premises. This contention of Ld. Counsel for respondent is without merits.

7. The next contention raised by Ld. counsel for respondent is that the petitioner is not Non-resident Indian and is not residing outside India. The expression NRI has been defined by Section 2 (dd) of the Act to mean a person of Indian origin who has either permanently or temporarily settled outside India for or taking up employment or for carrying on business or vocation or for any other purpose as would indicate his intention to stay outside India for an uncertain period. Two other statutes have referred to the expression `Person of India Origin, namely, the Card "S