RAKESH VIJ Vs. RAMINDER PAL SINGH SETHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Rakesh Vij has filed this Civil Revision, under Section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as applicable to the area of Chandigarh, against Dr. Raminder Pal Singh Sethi, respondent No. 1 and others and it has been directed against the order dated 16.11.2000 passed by the appellate authority, Chandigarh, which dismissed the appeal under Section 15 of the said Act by affirming the finding of the learned Rent Controller dated 16.9.1999 and one month time was granted to the appellant for handing over the possession of the demised premises to the landlord in question.

(2.) SOME facts can be noticed in the following manner. Respondent No. 1 Dr. Raminder Pal Singh Sethi is the co-owner and landlord of S.C.F. No. 8, Sector 16-D, Chandigarh and the petitioner was tenant in the dismissed premises at a monthly rent of Rs. 800/-. It was pleaded in the rent petition that landlord is Dental Surgeon and is running "Sethi Dental Clinic" in a portion of house No. 5, of Sector 16-A, Chandigarh and therefore, the premises in question is required by him for his personal use as owner of the building, where he is running his Dental Clinic, has filed the petition for his ejectment. It is also pleaded that separate space is required for dental X-rays etc. and another room is required for developing X-rays and fixing and separate space is required for reception and waiting room and one room is required for anesthesia and minor operations etc. As per the landlord, one room is required for office and therefore, the premises in question is required by him for his personal use and occupation. He requested the tenant to vacate to the premises but to no avail. Also there was another ground of ejectment that the tenant is in arrears of rent with effect from 1.11.1996. It was also averred by the landlord that he does not own or possess any other commercial property in the urban estate of Chandigarh nor he has vacated any other commercial property without any sufficient cause before filing of the rent petition.

(3.) THE landlord filed rejoinder to the written statement in which he reiterated the allegations of the rent petition by denying those of the written statement and from the above pleadings of the parties the learned Rent Controller framed the following issues :-