CITY CLUB REGD Vs. MOHINDER SAIN CHOPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the Rent Controller, dated September 28, 1989, whereby the leave to contest the ejectment petition under Section 13-A of the Act was declined.

(2.) THE landlord Mohinder Sain Chopra filed the ejectment petition on July 18, 1989, under Section 13-A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, as amended (for abort the 'act') alleging that he retired on July 1, 1989 as Deputy Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepure. Along with the petition, he also filed the certificate dated July 11, 1989, issued by the Financial Commissioner, Home and Secretary to Government, Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, Chandigarh, to this effect that he has been retired from service w. e f July 1, 1989.

(3.) IN the application filed by the tenant under Section 18-A of the Act for grant of permission to contest, it was pleaded that there was no proper certificate filed by the landlord as contemplated under Section 13-A of the Act. According to the tenant the competent authority to remove the landlord was the Govern r of Punjab and no certificate has been placed on record from the Governor. The second plea taken was that no proper notice under Section 18-A as such was issued as contemplated and, therefore, there was non-compliance of the statutory provisions and on that ground also the tenant was entitled leave to contest the ejectment petition. It was also contended that though no objection as such was taken in the affidavit that the demised premises was non-residential building but since it was let out to the City Club Pathankot, according to the learned counsel, from the very nature that it was let out to the City Club Pathankot, the premises could not be held to be residential building as such In support of his contentions he has referred to Messrs Delhi Cloth Mills and Ors. v. Lacchman Dass, (1989-2) 96 P. L. R. 242.