Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J
SATISH KUMAR AND ORS. – Appellant
Versus
RAMA SHANKAR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tenant's ejectment based on landlord's expressed need. (Para 1 , 2 , 12 , 18) |
| 2. court's rationale supporting landlord's business necessity. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments contesting the personal necessity of the landlord. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. legal definition surrounding sub-letting in tenancy. (Para 20) |
HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioners-tenants have filed the present civil revision petition impugning the order of ejectment passed by the Appellate Authority, Rewari vide order dated 13.03.2015 whereby, the appeal filed by the respondent-landlord was allowed and the order passed by the Rent Controller was set aside.
2. As per the brief facts, the respondent Rama Shankar (hereinafter referred as landlord) filed an ejectment petition seeking ejectment of the petitioners Satish Kumar, Saroj Bala and Banwari Lal on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent, personal necessity and subletting. It is pleaded that Satish Kumar, petitioner No.1 is a tenant in the shop in question on the basis of Rent Note dated 14.03.1980, executed between the petitioner No.1 Satish Kumar and Matadeen i.e. father of the respondent. Initially, the rate of rent was Rs.2
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
