OM PARKASH Vs. BADRI NATH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition arises In the circumstances which are briefly stated thus. The respondents are landlords of house property at Ambala Cantt., described as House No. 3880, Akbari Road, Kacha Bazar, Ambala Cantt. Om Parkash petitioner is a tenant of the said property for the last many years. The respondent-landlords are living as tenants at another house in Ambala Cantt., along with the ton of one of the respondents and his family, They sought the eviction of the petitioner from the premises in dispute on the ground of personal necessity for occupying the property. The petition was resisted by the petitioner and after protracted litigation for about seven years, the petitioner was ultimately ordered to be evicted, on the ground stated above. The appeal dot the petitioner before the Appellate Authority Ambala also failed. Hence, the present Revision Petition.

(2.) The sole point for consideration which arises in the present revision Petition is at to whether the respondents have succeeded in establishing their bonafide need for occupying the property. There appears to be no manner of doubt that they have succeeded in proving the game. The evidence is replete with the fact that the respondents who are living in a rented premises, are occupying three rooms at present for the entire family consisting of 14 persons. The Authorities below, therefore, came to the conclusion that the need of the landlords was quite bonafide for occupying their own property which they had purchased from Harmohinder Singh. There is no ground made out for interference In this concurrent finding of fact of the two Authorities below.

(3.) The learned, counsel for the petitioner has contended that the essential ingredients of section 13(3)(a)(i) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, have not been complied with. There is no basis for this contention. The two essential ingredients that the respondents had not vacated and property in the same Municipal area and that they do not possess any other property in that Municipal area have been fully established. The Revision Petition is without merit and is consequently dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.