S.D.ANAND, J.

1. The controversy requiring adjudication lies in a narrow compass.

2. The respondent-landlady Harminder kaur applied for the ejectment of petitioners herein from the tenanted premises on a plea of personal bonafide necessity. The plea was allowed by the learned Rent Controller, vide order dated 4.3.2008. The order was affirmed by the learned Appellate Authority, vide its judgment dated 8.9.2009. The respondent-landlady died during the pendency of the appeal. A plea was raised before the learned Appellate Authority to the effect that petition deserves dismissal on account of the death of the respondent-landlady because the only premise to obtain the order for ejectment was based upon her own necessity which ended with her death. The plea did not find favour with the learned

3. Appellate Authority which held that "bonafide requirement of the landlord is to be seen on the date of application and the subsequent development during the pendency of the eviction petition due to slow process of litigation should not be permitted to be misused by the sitting tenant". The learned Appellate authority, in obtaining that view, relied upon 2005 (1) RCR (Rent) 178, 2004 (2)