KARAMVEER SINGH RAJPUT Vs. VIRENDRA SINGH TOMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 16/4/2015, a Suit, being Suit No. 5 of 2015, Virendra Singh Tomar Vs. Karamveer Singh Rajput, was instituted by the landlord/respondent herein, invoking the provisions of Sec. 15 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, praying for vacation of the tenement shop, which has been described therein, in the plaint, the tenancy of which, has been terminated by the landlord/respondent, by issuance of the Notice under Sec. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, as it was issued on 12/3/2013, which has been admittedly served upon the tenant/revisionist herein on 13/3/2013.

(2.) The proceedings of SCC Suit, as instituted on 16/4/2015, was contested by the revisionist by filing a written statement, and in the written statement thus filed on 17/8/2015, the ground taken therein by the revisionist was to the effect that the so-called need, which has been expressed by the landlord/respondent in his plaint under Sec. 15 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, for engaging his son, who was alleged to be working as Junior Engineer, working on contractual basis in the Public Works Department, he submits, that the said need, as expressed by the landlord/respondent in the proceedings under Sec. 15, since not being bonafide, it will not be treated that the landlord/respondent, had approached the Court with clean hands, by filing a proceeding under Sec. 15 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, for the reason being, that there existed no bonafide need, owing to the engagement of the landlord's son as pleaded in para 3 of the written statement.

(3.) On exchange of the pleadings, learned trial Court has framed the following issues:-