Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR
Mohinder Paul Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
Sita Ram Dhingra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J.
1. This revision petition is directed against the concurrent findings of the learned Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority, vide which the petitioner/tenant (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) has been ordered to be evicted from the demised premises in a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), instituted by the respondents/landlords (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) in Rent Petition No. RENT/2/2019 titled “Sita Ram Dhingra and another Vs. Mohinder Paul Bhardwaj”, vide judgments dated 03.02.2023 and 02.02.2026 respectively.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner/tenant and have gone through the material placed on the file.
3. Case of the petitioners/landlords is that they are owners-cum-landlords of the demised shop in which the respondent was inducted as a tenant about 40 years ago and presently, the rate of rent is Rs.1400/- per month. Petitioner No.1–Sita Ram Dhingra wants to get the shop vacated in question for starting his own business and he also needs the same to settle Sushant Sethi, who is the son of his divorced daughter Pooja D
Landlords possess the right to evict tenants based on bona fide personal necessity, which is not undermined by their ownership of other properties deemed unsuitable for their intended use.
Bona fide requirement for eviction is determined by the landlord's genuine need, not dictated by tenant's preferences.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
