ONKAR NATH Vs. VED VYAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have heard counsel on both sides in this short rent control case. The ground on which eviction was sought was in terms of Section 13 (3) (a) (i) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. The sub-section reads thus :

(3.) The statute benignly designed to protect tenants from unreasonable evictions has taken care to put restrictions which must be rigorously construed to fulfil the purpose of the statute. A mere affidavit at a late stage of the letigative process can hardly be adequate to meet the mandate of Section 13 (3) of the Act. In these circumstances, we are constrained to allow the appeal. It is unfortunate that the respondent who moved for eviction is himself an advocate and at least for that reason, cannot plead ignorance of law. The appeal is allowed but as a special extenuation in favour of his ignorance of law, we allow him to file proceedings, for eviction de novo if so advised making it clear that the allowance of the present appeal will not stand in his way. The appeal is allowed with costs quantified at Rs. 1000/-.