RAMAN KUMAR NAIR Vs. DINESH KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondent herein filed a petition under Sec. 12 of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 for eviction of suit premises along with arrears of rent on the ground that despite termination of tenancy by notice, the petitioner herein failed to vacate the premises. The ground raised was that he was in arrears did not pay the rent despite the notice apart from that the suit property was required bona-fide to start the business of respondent's son who was without any avocation after his graduation. The Rent Controlling Authority as well as the Tribunal after evaluating the facts and evidence came to conclusion that the petition filed by the respondent deserves to be allowed resulting into decree for eviction.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner who is tenant would submit that the entire petition was based on agreement dtd. 12/12/1995 and tenancy was for more than a year, as such, the agreement itself was inadmissible in evidence. He placed reliance on a case law reported in Anthony v. K.C. Ittoop and Sons and others decided on 1/7/2000. It is further submitted that the ownership of the suit premises itself was in dispute inasmuch as a civil suit is pending in respect of the said premises wherein the petitioner was also a party. Consequently in absence of ownership right, the respondent could not be adjudicated to be the owner of the property and accordingly, there ought to have been a dismissal orders passed against the respondent.