DARSHAN KUMAR Vs. MAHANT BHAGWAN PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant -Petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order of the Appellate Authority, dated 17th February, 1975, whereby his appeal was dismissed and the order of ejectment was pasted by the Rent Controller against him was maintained.

(2.) THE Respondent landlord sought ejectment of the Petitioner on various grounds, but in this petition we are only concerned with the bona fide requirement of the premises of his own use and occupation. The Rent Controller and as well as the Appellate Authority have concurrently by found that there Is bona fide need of the landlord and he requires the premises for lis own use and occupation In the application for ejectment, it was pleaded that "the applicant bona fide requires the demised premises for his own occupation He has no residential house in the urban area of Amritsar City. At present he is residing in Khaira, a border town from where he wants to shift to Amritsar for security measures and for the education of his children "In reply to this para, the tenant -Petitioner in the written statement has stated that "It is wrong and denied The applicant does not require the premises for his own occupation He has no business or other connections at Amritsar It is incorrect that he wants to shift to Amritsar for security measures and education of his children There is a High School at Khaira....

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner was unable to assail the concurrent findings of the Authorities below as to the bona fide requirement of the landlord for his own use and occupation Moreover, this is a finding of fact which has been arrived at after the appreciation of the evidence on the record.