PAWAN KUMAR BANSAL Vs. GAURAV GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts in the first instance:

(2.) The landlord filed an ejectment plea against the tenant (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') on an averment of personal necessity and non-payment of rent. The averment made by the landlord, in the context, was that he is a recently married practising Advocate; that his father/co-owner is also a practising Advocate and that the later (father of the landlord) wants to settle his son independently in the premises aforementioned which would be used for residential and also office purpose. It was the further averment that the parents of the petitioner are themselves putting up in a rented accommodation which is insufficient to accommodate their recently married son and a domestic help. Yet another averment in the relevant behalf, was that the petitioner and his wife own a 2-1/2 storied 7-1/2 marla house (bearing House No. 3145, Sector 40, Chandigarh) and they can shift to that house wherein the accommodation available is sufficient for their use.

(3.) Insofar as the non-payment of rent is concerned, it is apparent from the record that the petitioner is not proved to have paid rent for the indicated period on account of denial of relationship.