The main legal point established is that when the entire premises are needed bona fide by the landlord for personal use, it is immaterial whether the premises were rented out by one rent note or several rent notes.

D.K.Mahajan, J.

1. This petition for revision is directed against the decision of the appellate authority reversing on appeal the decision of the Rent Controller dismissing the landlords application for eviction of the tenant.

2. Eviction was claimed on a number of grounds, but the only ground germane so far as this petition is concerned is one of the personal necessity of the landlord. Before the Rent Controller a contention was resisted that the premises namely two rooms had been let out to the tenant on two different dates and therefore, there were to separate tenancies and thus a single petition for eviction of the tenant was not competent. This contention prevailed with the Rent Controller inspite of the fact that the landlord had conceded that the landlord bona fide required the premises for his personal use. The landlord appealed to the appellate authority and the appellate authority came to the conclusion that there was no legal bar on the landlord claiming eviction of the tenant from the totality of the premises irrespective of the fact whether they have been rented out under one rent note or two rent notes. In view of the concession of the tenant the eviction was ordered and the decision of the Rent Controller was set aside. The tenant has come up in revision to this court.

3. Two contentions have been raised by Mr. Sarin, the learned counsel for the petitioner. One is that the landlord cannot make a single application when the premises had been separately rented out, claiming eviction of the tenant on grounds of personal necessity and secondly that one of the rooms is a shop and, therefore, no eviction from it can be ordered.

4. So far as first contention is concerned I do not find any merit in it. The tenant is one and the landlord is one. It is immaterial whether the premises rented out by on rent note or by several rent notes. When the entire premises are needed bona fide by the landlord for his personal use, the contention raised is wholly besides the point. Therefore, I repell the first contention.

5. So far as the second contention is concerned, the Rent Controller as well as the appellate authority found that one of the rooms, which is claimed to be a shop, is not a shop. The question whether a room is shop or not is a question of fact and the concurrent decision of the two authorities below thereon is binding is revision in so far as this court is concerned.

6. For the reasons recorded above the petition fails and is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

7. I grant three months time from today to vacate the premises; provided that there are no arrears of rent. If the tenant is in arrears of rent, he should pay the arrears within one month alongwith the rent for three months, otherwise, the eviction will take place after the expiry of one month.