IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal
CR No.1573 of 2011 (O & M)
Thakar Dass
v.
Madan Mohan
{Decided on 06/08/2018}
In the present case, in the petition, the landlady had concealed the existence of third shop and when she was confronted with the aforesaid fact in the written statement, she did not accept availability of the third shop in the replication. In evidence for the first time, the landlady made a statement that third shop is being used by Adarsh Mohan for storing garbage. Even at that stage the landlady did not come forward with clean hands and pleaded that the third shop is available. There is no evidence on the file which proves that the third shop is being used by Adarsh Mohan. In fact, the entire case of the landlady is based upon incorrect facts. Courts below have erred in returning a finding that the third shop is being used by Adarsh Mohan as a store particularly in view of the statement of the landlady, who claims that Adarsh Mohan, her other son is running his business only from one shop. (Para 8)
Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J.(Oral) - Tenant-petitioner is in the revision petition against the order passed by the Rent Controller affirmed by the Appellate Authority ordering his eviction on the ground of personal necessity. As per Section 13 (3) (a) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, landlord while filing a petition is required to plead accommodation in his occupation. Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 is extracted as under:-
“13. Eviction of tenants -
(1) A tenant in possession of a building or rented land shall not be evicted therefrom in execution of a decree passed before or after the commencement of this Act or otherwise and whether before or after the termination of the tenancy, except in accordance with the provisions of this Section, 1[or in pursuance of an order made under Section 13 of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1947, as subsequently amended.]
(2) A landlord who seeks to evict his tenant shall apply to the Controller for a direction in that behalf. If the Controller, after giving the tenant a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the applicant, is satisfied
(i) that the tenant has not paid or tendered the rent due by him in respect of the building or rented land within fifteen days after the expiry of the time fixed in the agreement of tenancy with his landlord or in the absence of any such agreement, by the last day of the month next following that for which the rent is payable:
Provided that if the tenant on the first hearing of the application for ejectment after due service pays or tenders the arrears of rent and interest at six per cent per annum on such arrears together with the cost of application assessed by the Controller, the tenant shall be deemed to have duly paid or tendered the rent within the time aforesaid;
(ii) That the tenant has after the commencement of this Act without the written consent of the landlord-
(a) Transferred his right under the lease or sublet the entire building or rented land or any portion thereof; or
(b) Used the building or rented land for a purpose other than that for which it was leased, or
(iii) That the tenant has committed such acts as are likely to impair materially the value or utility of the building or rented land, or
(iv) that the tenant has been guilty of such acts and conduct as are a nuisance to the occupiers of buildings in the neighbourhood, or
(v) That where the building is situated in a place other than a hill-station, the tenant has ceased to occupy the building for a continuous period of four months without reasonable cause, the Controller may make an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the building or rented land and if the Controller is not so satisfied he shall make an order rejecting the application:
Provided that the Controller may give the tenant a reasonable time for putting the landlord in possession of the building or rented land and may extend such time so as not to exceed three months in the aggregate.
(3) (a) A landlord may apply to the Controller for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession-
(i) In the case of a residential building if –
(a) he requires it for his own occupation;
(b) he is not occupying another residential building, in the urban area concerned; and
(c) He has not vacated such a building without sufficient cause after the commencement of this Act, in the said urban area;
(d) it was let to the tenant for use as a residence by reason of his being in the service or employment of the landlord, and the tenant has ceased, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, to be in such service or employment:
Provided that where the tenant is workman who has been discharged or dismissed by the landlord from his service or employment in contravention of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, he shall not be liable to be evicted until the competent authority under that Act confirms the order of discha
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.