RAM PAL Vs. JOGINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed directed against the judgment of the Appellate Authority and of the Rent Controller, Ludhiana dated 21.4.1989 and 22.8.1996 respectively. The learned Rent Controller has passed an order of eviction against the petitioner which was upheld by the Appellate Authority.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that respondent Joginder Singh had filed a petition for eviction against the petitioner asserting that the petitioner is a tenant in the suit premises at a monthly rent of Rs. 70/- besides house tax. The petitioner was alleged to be in arrears of rent from 1.3.1980. It was further the case of the respondent that the property in dispute is bonafide required by the respondent for his personal use. The respondent was stated to be in occupation of one room, one drawing room and a kitchen. His family comprises of two sons and two daughters, out of whom one son and a daughter were of marriageable age and one daughter was studying in school. The accommodation with him was stated to be insufficient and that the respondent was not occupying any other residential building nor has vacated any such building in Ludhiana.

(3.) THE learned Rent Controller held that the plea of house tax had not been pressed and thus the petitioner was not liable to pay the same. He further concluded that the property was let and was used by the tenant for the business of dry-cleaning and ironing the clothes. The building however was bonafide required by the respondent for his personal use and occupation. The order of eviction was passed. In appeal the learned Appellate Authority returned the findings that in fact the property also was not let for commercial purpose. It was held that it was let for residential purpose. It was further concluded that the respondent bonafide required the same for himself and members of his family. Aggrieved by the said findings and dismissal of the appeal, the present revision petition had been filed.