The court affirmed that a Non-Resident Indian landlord can seek eviction under Section 13B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, if bona fide need is established.

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Archana Puri, J.

Petitioner Ved Parkash, proprietor of M/s Goldy Juice Bar, in the capacity of being tenant of the shop, described by boundaries, forming part of property bearing municipal No.B-XVII-243, Taraf Karabara, Model Town Road, Bharat Nagar, Ludhiana, has filed the present revision petition.

2. In the instant revision petition, the petitioners-tenant challenged the denial of leave to defend and consequential order of eviction passed in the ejectment petition filed under Section 13B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949.

3. The facts germane, to be noticed, are as follows:-

That, Bhupinder Singh Bansal, NRI had invoked the special provision under Section 13B of the ibid Act, for recovery of immediate possession of demised shop. It was pleaded that property bearing No.B-XVII-243, Taraf Karabara, Model Town Road, Bharat Nagar, Ludhiana, was purchased by Smt. Chand Kaur, wife of Bhag Singh (mother of the respondent-landlord), vide sale deed dated 05.03.1952. After the death of Chand Kaur on 13.03.1996, the respondent-landlord, along with his brothers, namely Devinder Singh Bansal, Jaswant Singh Bansal, Bhagwant Singh Bansal and Amarjit Bansal, inherited the property in question, in equal shares and their names stood duly incorporated in the municipal records as well as revenue records.

4. Initially, Sh.Buta Ram, father of Ved Parkash was inducted as a tenant in respect of demised shop, out of the property, referred above @ Rs. 50/- per month and after the death of Buta Ram, tenant Ved Parkash stepped into his shoes and started paying rent to the respondent-landlord against receipts. The rent stood paid uptill May 2001. Also, it was averred that respondent is one of the owner/landlord and his brothers, who are co-owners of the property in question, have given a General Power of Attorney, in favour of the Bhupinder Singh Bansal to file the ejectment petition and to do all acts in that relation of their share in the entire property, of which the said shop is a part. Thus, on this basis, it was claimed that there exists relationship of landlord and tenant, between the parties.

5. Further, it was also averred that the respondent is 'Non-resident Indian' and intended to return to India to settle down here in Ludhiana City, where he is presently residing with his relatives. He has no accommodation of his own in useable and worth living condition. He has only one property in question in India as well as for his other family members. Besides the same, also it was averred that he wants to make his children learn Indian culture and Sikh tenements.

6. Furthermore, it was averred in the ejectment petition by the landlord that the shop in question is on the front portion of the property. In all, there are four tenants including the present respondent in the building, against whom, he is going to file separate eviction petitions, as he cannot use the premises in an effective manner, without getting all the shops vacated. All the shops are said to be part of one building and were converted into different shops, while constructing walls under single roof. Moreover, it was averred that the shop in occupation of the tenant was required by the landlord for his business use and occupation, as the rear portion of the property cannot be put to any use, without getting the shops vacated, as the front is required to be enlarged, to open showroom/office, the area where the property is located, being residential/commercial.

7. Also therein, it was asserted that the landlord intends to open exclusive furniture showroom on the ground floor and to keep his residence on the first floor. The property will also become spacious, which is requirement of time and need of the landlord. The remaining portion of the property, which is in possession of the owners-landlords, is in dilapidated condition and is unsafe and unfit for human habitation. There is only 5 feet passage for ingress and outgress to that portion and the owners/landl