AMRIT LAL WALIA Vs. BHAGWAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under Section 15 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act against the order of the Appellate Authority dated March 31, 1980, whereby ejectment of the petitioner from the house in dispute was ordered. The Respondent is represented by Shri G.S. Sachdeva, an outside counsel. So actual date notice was sent to the counsel but he has not put in appearance inspite of service. The petition was consequently heard ex-parte.

(2.) Ejectment was claimed on the ground of personal necessity. The Appellate Authority found that the landlord was in occupation of a house, other than the house in dispute, as tenant but then observed that he could not be said to be in possession as of right.

(3.) There was some conflict in the two decision of this court as to whether a landlord in possession of a building as tenant was entitled to make an application for ejectment of the tenant from the premises owned by him. The matter has since been settled by Division Bench in Karnail Singh v. Vidya Wati, 1980 CurLJ 285 , wherein it has been held that a landlord in possession of residential house as a tenant is in possession thereof in his own right and is not entitled to file an application for ejectment of the tenant from the house owned by him without showing anything more. It is, therefore, now settled that such a landlord, before he can seek ejectment of his tenant, has to further show a sufficient cause for him to vacate the premises in his occupation as a tenant. In the present case, nothing has been pleaded in this respect and, on the contrary, a false averment has been made that he is not in possession of any other residential house within the locality concerned. Consequently, this revision is allowed, the order of the Appellate Authority set aside and the petition for ejectment dismissed. As the respondent is unrepresented, the parties are left to bear their own costs.