SUSHILA REHANI Vs. SURJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revisionist has invoked revisional jurisdiction of this Court Under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act assailing the order dated 12.12.1994 passed by Rent Controller Patiala as well as order dated 7.10.1996 passed by Appellate Authority' Patiala whereby the eviction petition filed by Respondent No. 1 - landlord was allowed and eviction order was passed.

(2.) The brief facts of the present case are that an eviction petition Under Section 13 was filed by the landlord (Respondent No. 1 herein) initially against Respondent No. 2 (Bank herein) contending that Bank has taken House No. 5-B from the landlord on rent as a tenant @ Rs. 700/- per month to be paid in advance. It has further been contended that Respondent - Bank has allowed Mr. B.L. Rehani, Manager of the Bank to occupy the disputed premises. The further contention of the landlord is that tenant has failed to pay rent since March 1988. The further ground for eviction taken is that tenant has raised unauthorized construction on the premises without the permission of the landlord and construction has diminished the utility and value of the building.

(3.) In the reply Bank has stated that Bank has taken demised, premises on rent vide receipt dated 26.9.1982. It has further been contended that demised premises was taken on rent for the residence of Sh. B.L. Rehani. It has further been stated by the Bank that Sh. B.L. Rehani has expired on 26.1.1988 and after his death his legal heirs are in occupation of the demised premises. It has further been contended by the Bank that Bank is not liable to pay the rent after death of Sh. B.L. Rehani and Bank has paid entire rent to the landlord upto 31.3.1988.