Viney Mittal, J.

1. The tenant is the petitioner before this Court. He is aggrieved against the order of eviction dated December 4, 2003 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Kapurthala.

2. Landlord, Karamjit Singh, filed an ejectment petition against tenant, Jarnail Singh. The ejectment of the tenant was sought on the grounds of arrears of rent as well as the demised premises having been sub-let by the tenant to respondent No. 2 Charanjit Singh. Additionally, the landlord also sought eviction on the ground of personal necessity.

3. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the ejectment petition filed by the landlord. All the grounds of ejectment were negated.

4. The landlord took up the matter in appeal. The learned Appellate Authority reappraised the entire evidence. Whereas the learned Appellate found that the ground of arrears of rent taken by the landlord was not correct but the learned Appellate Authority held that the landlord had been able to prove that he required the prentises for his personal necessity as well as the tenant had sub-let the premises to Charanjit Singh without the written consent of the landlord. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, the learne