KASHMIRI LAL Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The landlords (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') launched proceedings for ejectment of the tenants (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners') from the premises detailed in site plan (exhibited as A-1 before the learned Rent Controller-hereinafter referred to as 'the premises').

(2.) Eviction was applied for on an averment that the premises were required for his own use and occupation. The further averment made in the context, on the statutory format, was that he is not in possession of any other residential building in the urban area concerned and he has not vacated any such residential building without sufficient cause after commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(3.) The petitioners contested the ejectment request by averring that the respondent is not in need of the premises for his own use and occupation inasmuch as he is presently residing in a house belonging to his mother which (house) is also shared by another brother of his who resides over there with his family.