LAWS(DLH)-1978-12-5

HIRA LAL Vs. BANARSI DASS

Decided On December 22, 1978
HIRA LAL Appellant
V/S
BANARASI DASS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal by two brothers and legal representatives of the 3rd claiming to be joint tenants of a residential premises assails the order of the Rent Control Tribunal upholding that of the Controller allowing the plea for eviction.

(2.) The landlord respondent sought eviction of Hira Lal, appellant No. 1, on a number of grounds. Hira Lal resisted the petition contesting all the grounds, including the allegation that he had sublet, assigned or parted with possession of the demised premises in favour of his two brothers and had acquired another premises where he has been residing with his family. Hira Lal pleaded that the premises had been held by all the three brothers as Joint tenants since 1953. In view of this plea the landlord amended the petition and impleaded the other two brothers. One of the brothers died during the pendency of the proceedings and his legal representatives were brought on record. The Controller allowed the plea of eviction under Sectionl4(l)(b)andl4(l)(d), holding that Hira Lal alone was the tenant and had parted with possession in favour of his brothers and that the premises having been let for use as aresidence. Neither Hira Lal nor any member of his family had been residing there for a period of six months immediately before the date of the filing of the petition. The other grounds of eviction, including the ground under Section 14(1) (e), based on the bonafide persona] need of the landlord, were repeled. "The order of eviction was challenged in appeal and the landlord filed cross-objections, in so far as the ground regarding bona fide personal need was negatived by the Controller. The tribunal not only upheld the order of eviction of; the. two grounds, on which it was based by the Controller, but also accepted the cross-obJection of the landlord and Justified eviction on the additional ground of bona fide personal need of the landlord.

(3.) A number of contentions were urged on behalf of the appellants to obtain a reversal of the order of eviction.