BISANDAYAL AGARWALLA Vs. NANDAKISHORE GOENKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ application arises out of a proceeding started under the provisions of the Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1967 (for short "the Act") against the Petitioner for his eviction from the shop premises in which be is carrying on business on the grounds that: (1) the landlord requires the premises in good faith for the occupation OF his son who wants to start a medicine shop and. (2) the tenant is a wilful defaulter in payment of rent.

(2.) THE case was contested by the Petitioner who denied both the grounds and took a stand that since he did not accede to the demand of the landlord for enhancing the rent, the present action has been started.

(3.) MR . Ashok Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner -tenant, assailed the impugned orders firstly on the ground that the requirement of the premises by the landlord for a major son could not be deemed to be a requirement of the landlord within the meaning of Section 7 (4) of the Act which reads as follows: