UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK Vs. LALIT BAHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed by the tenant under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), assailing the order dated 07.03.1986 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar, as well as order dated 23.07.1993 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Jalandhar, whereby both the Courts below directed eviction of the tenant- revisionist.

(2.) The brief facts of the present case are that the landlord preferred eviction petition under Section 13 of the Act from the ground floor of the demised premises situated at G.T. Road, Jalandhar City on the ground that the tenant is in arrears of rent since 01.09.1986; disputed premises is a part of the residential building, hence, it is bona fide needed by the landlord for his own use and occupation; at present the applicant and his brother Deepak Bahri Respondent No. 3 are living with their families in a house near the Session Court, Jalandhar; their wives quarrel with each other. The atmosphere of the house is vitiated, which is affecting the health and mind of the applicant and Respondent No. 3. Therefore, the applicant intends to take separate residence from his brother Respondent No. 3 and he intends to take residence in the disputed premises and he bonafidely needs it for use and occupation by his family. It is also averred in the eviction petition that applicant is not in possession of any other residential accommodation within the municipal limits of Jalandhar, nor he has vacated one.

(3.) Tenants contested the -application and tendered entire arrears of rent with interest and cost as assessed by the Court. It is averred by the tenant that landlord does not require demised premises for use and occupation by him and his family and it is further stated that applicant and his brother Respondent No. 3 are living in a house situated opposite to the Session Court, Jalandhar which is sufficient for their residence and alleged need is neither bonafide nor genuine.