PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. NIRMAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision by the tenant in a rent control proceeding under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act of 1949 has come about after an earlier disposal by this Court in a Civil Revision No. 4288 of 2008, decided on 30.05.2009 brought at the instance of the landlord. Initially in the application filed by the landlord under Section 13B of the Act, the tenant had applied for grant of leave to defend which had been granted by the Rent Controller. In a challenge against the said order in Civil Revision No. 4288 of 2008, the order of the Rent Controller was set aside and the leave granted to the tenant was withdrawn and the matter was remitted to the Rent Controller for a singular consideration to take up the petition only for the purpose of satisfaction of the Rent Controller whether the landlord had established the grounds for eviction and pass appropriate orders in terms of Section 18-A of the Act.

(2.) To appreciate the scope of enquiry before the Rent Controller after remand from High Court, the relevant portion of the Section is reproduced:

(3.) In the cross-examination of the petitioner, it was elicited that the petitioner had previously filed a similar petition against the Bank in the year 1995 on the ground of personal necessity but it was dismissed. It was suggested to the petitioner that the property was not required by him and that the petition had been filed only to pressurize the Bank to enhance the rent. The Rent Controller was satisfied about the NRI status of the petitioner and also found that the petitioner's personal requirement had been established. The Rent Controller observed that the leave to sue which had been granted to the tenant had been denied by the High Court and the matter had been remitted to the Court only for the satisfaction of the Court about the fulfillment of the conditions to obtain eviction under Section 13B of the Act. Having thus been satisfied, the order of eviction had been passed.