HARJEET SINGH BEDI Vs. ISHWAR DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is in revision against the order dated 14.1.2009 vide which the learned Appellate Authority upheld the order dated 3.4.2008, granted by the learned Rent Controller, allowing a petition filed by the respondent-landlord and directing the ejectment of the petitioner-tenant from the tenanted premises on a finding that the latter had ceased to occupy the tenanted premises for the last about one year. The controversy presently is only qua that finding.

(2.) Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner-tenant, argued that the approach of the learned Appellate Authority in recording the finding under challenge is wholly erroneous in view of the fact that it draws essential sustenance from the fact that the electricity supply to the premises had ceased to be available about a year ago. While averring that it was the respondent-landlord who had connived with the electricity authorities to get the electric supply to the tenanted premises disconnected, it was argued that the mere proven fact of non consumption of electricity during the period aforementioned is, by itself, not sufficient to hold that the tenant had ceased to occupy the premises aforementioned. In support of the advocated contention, reliance was placed upon Sohan Lal and Anr. v. Gurbachan Singh,1989 2 PLR 478 and Geenta Bhalla and Ors. v. Krishan Kumar (dead) through Lrs.,2006 2 RCR 379.

(3.) The plea, raised on behalf of the petitioner-tenant is denuded of force and the judicial pronouncements relied upon are inapplicable to the case before this Court in the facts and circumstances of the case. The reasons therefor are as under: