BHUSHAN KUMAR Vs. MALKIAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revision petitions are being disposed of by a common order as these pertain to the same premises which have been taken on rent by the petitioner and on account of which two separate eviction petitions were filed by the respondent-landlord.

(2.) Initially the respondent-landlord filed eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 against the petitioner seeking his eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent. It was pleaded by him that a rent note was executed between the petitioner and the respondent which contemplated the monthly rent of the premises @ Rs. 1,200/- per month to be increased @ 5% per annum. At the time of filing of the petition it was claimed that the rate of rent was Rs. 1,260/- per month and the petitioner was said to be in arrears of rent w.e.f. February, 2005 till the time of filing of the petition.

(3.) The petitioner controverted the allegations. The Rent Controller disbelieved the version of the petitioner and ordered his eviction and directed him to make the payment of rent within a period of one month from the date of passing of the order. The petitioner did not comply with the order of the Rent Controller but chose to challenge the same. In appeal the findings were affirmed. However, at the time of commencement of the appeal the petitioner was granted some time to deposit the rent which he did. During the pendency of these proceedings the respondent-landlord filed another petition for eviction of the petitioner from the premises in question by taking the plea of personal necessity as well. The Rent Controller upon appraisal of the material before it qua the issue of personal necessity accepted the plea of the respondent and ordered the eviction of the petitioner. The Appellate Authority did likewise. This is the subject-matter of Civil Revision No. 8130 of 2010, while the other civil revision bearing No. 8204 of 2010 is the outcome of the grievance of the petitioner against the orders of the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority in a petition which was preferred by the respondent pertaining to non-payment of rent alone.