The landlord's bonafide necessity for business expansion can justify an eviction order, and the tenant's objections must be supported by evidence to rebut the landlord's case.

JUDGMENT

Harkesh Manuja, J. - By way of present revision petition, challenge has been made to the orders dated 12.09.2018 and 07.12.2020 passed by learned Rent Controller as well as learned Appellate Authority, respectively, whereby an eviction petition filed at the instance of respondent/landlord has been allowed, directing the petitioner/tenant to vacate the tenanted premises.

2. The facts leading to the present revision petition are that the tenanted premises in question which is shop bearing No.656, situated at Chowk Moni, Amritsar, already in possession of petitioner/ tenant (hereinafter referred to as 'tenant') was purchased by the respondent/landlord (hereinafter referred to as 'landlord') vide registered sale deed dated 14.03.2005. Thereafter, an eviction petition was filed on 12.12.2012 against the tenant on the grounds of arrears of rent as well as the tenanted premises having been rendered unfit and unsafe for human habitation. The said eviction petition was withdrawn by the landlord on 24.12.2012.

3. In the year 2013, a fresh eviction petition was filed by the landlord against the tenant on the grounds of arrears of rent, tenanted premises having been rendered unfit and unsafe for human habitation and also the same being required by the landlord for expansion of his business by reconstructing the same.

4. The tenant was put to notice. A written statement came to be filed at his instance, inter-alia, submitting that once the previous eviction petition was withdrawn, a fresh eviction petition could not have been entertained. It was also submitted that the arrears of rent having been deposited, the said ground did not survive. As regards the bonafide necessity of the landlord, it was submitted that he was already in occupation of sufficient accommodation as he was carrying his business in the adjacent building.

5. Learned Rent Controller vide its order dated 12.09.2018 allowed the eviction petition filed at the instance of landlord on the ground of his bonafide requirement as regards the expansion of his business. The aforesaid eviction order was upheld by the learned Appellate Authority in an appeal filed at the instance of tenant vide its order dated 07.12.2020. It has been pointed out here that the eviction order was passed on the ground of bonafide necessity of the landlord, however, on account of deposit of arrears of rent, it was recorded that the ground of arrears of rent does not survive. Besides it, both the authorities below also recorded that the landlord failed to prove the tenanted premises to be unfit and unsafe for human habitation.

6. Challenging the impugned orders dated 12.09.2018 and 07.12.2020 by way of filing the present revision petition, learned counsel for the tenant submits that as the landlord did not file any site plan along with the eviction petition, the same could not have been entertained. It has also been submitted that the landlord having other commercial properties besides the tenanted premises, cannot be held to have proved his bonafide necessity, regarding his requirement of additional accommodation for the purpose of expansion of business. It was also argued that having withdrawn the previous eviction petition on 24.12.2012, the subsequent eviction petition filed in the year 2013, culminating into the passing of the impugned orders, was not maintainable.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the tenant and gone through the paper-book. I do not find any force in the submissions made on behalf of the tenant. Admittedly, in the present case, no dispute was ever raised by the tenant as regards the identity of the tenanted premises including its dimensions. On the other hand, specific shop number besides its dimensions have been provided in the eviction petition by the landlord. In this view of the matter, landlord could not have been non-suited for want of filing of site plan along with the eviction petition. As regards the plea of withdrawal of the previous eviction petition, it may be recorde