(1.) The landlord-petitioner has filed this revision against the order of the Appellate Authority, Gurgaon, dated 30th August, 1973, where by the order of the rent Controller, dismissing application of the tenant under Section 13 (4) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has been set aside.
(2.) One Shrimati Yogwanti was the owner of the house in dispute, which was rented out to Khushi Ram Sharma. The said Yogwanti filed an eviction application against her tenant on the ground of personal necessity and in that application, an eviction order was passed on the basis of the statements of the parties. By this statement the tenant accepted that Yogwanti had personal necessity of her and that of her family. On the basis of this statement dated 15th July, 1968, the eviction order was passed on that day vide copy exhibit P. 1 by which the eviction of the tenant was ordered and it was directed that he shall deliver the possession of the tenanted premises to Shrimati Yogwanti on or before 31st December, 1969. According to the tenant, he delivered the possession of the house in question to Smt. Yogwanti on Ist January, 1970, but Smt. Yogwanti never occupied the house and sold it away to Jaivir (petitioner) by means of a registered sale-deed, dated 23rd November, 1970, a copy of which is Exhibit P. W. 3/1 on the file for a consideration of Rs. 12,000/-. On 3rd December, 1970, the tenant Khushi Ram filed an application under sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act, in which it was prayed that the landlord be directed to restore the possession of the building as he has failed to occupy the same for a continuous period of 12 months from the date of obtaining possession. In this application, both the landlords, i.e. the original landlord Shmt. Yogwanti, and as well as her transferee Jaivir were made parties. This application was contested by the transferee Jaivir only. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed : -
(3.) Whether the application is not maintainable in view of preliminary objection No. 1