SANT LAL Vs. MAMTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant-petitioner has filed the present revision petition under Section 15(6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, (hereinafter to be referred as "the 1973 Act"), against the orders of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, affirmed in appeal by the Appellate Authority.

(2.) Landlady-respondent had filed the petition under Section 13 of the 1973 Act on the ground of her bona fide requirement. She is a Doctor having degree of Bachelor's in Dental Science. She wants to open her clinic from the tenanted premises. The petitioner-tenant contested the petition on the ground that her requirement is not bona fide. It was further pleaded that her father is in the business of purchase and sale of the property and has other shops.

(3.) When the petition was pending before the Rent Controller, shoot married with an Engineer and started residing at Pune. However, during the pendency of the petition itself, she came and settled in Noida as her husband got an employment in Noida.