LAWS(P&H)-2001-4-77

SANTOKH SINGH Vs. JASWANT SINGH AND ANOTHER

Decided On April 30, 2001
SANTOKH SINGH Appellant
V/S
Jaswant Singh And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PIARA Singh, the Respondent -landlord of House No. 409 -L, Model Town, Jalandhar City, filed an ejectment application against Santokh Singh, the Petitioner - tenant, on various grounds. It was pleaded that the Petitioner was liable to be ejected on the grounds of non -payment of rent with effect from 1.12.1986. Ejectment was also sought on the ground that the Petitioner - tenant had impaired the value and utility of the premises by effecting constructions thereupon. The real contest between the parties has, however, been on the ground of bona -fide personal necessity.

(2.) ON the issue of arrears of rent, it was claimed that the tenant had not paid rent from 1.12.1986. The rate of rent was also disputed. The tenant claimed that rent was payable at the rate of Rs. 170/ - per month, whereas the landlord asserted that it was payable at the rate of Rs. 250/ - per month. On the first date of hearings, the tenant tendered rent for the period from 1.12.1986 to 31.5.1989 at the rate of Rs. 170/ - per month i.e. a sum of Rs. 5200/ -. Besides tendering rent, the Petitioner -tenant also tendered interest (Rs. 410/ - ) and costs (Rs. 100/ - ) as assessed by the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller held that the rent payable was at rhe rate of Rs. 170/ - per month. In view of the aforesaid finding of fact, the Rent Controller also held that the tender made by the Petitioner -tenant to the Petitioner -landlord was valid.

(3.) THE plea raised by the Landlord -Piara Singh on the ground of bona fide personal necessity has been the issue of primary contention between the parties. The aforesaid plea has two facets. Firstly, whether the aforesaid plea raised again at the behest of the Respondent -landlord is barred by the principle of res judicata. Secondly, if the aforesaid plea is not barred by the principle of res judicata, is the tenant Santokh Singh liable to be ejected on the ground of the landlords bona -fide personal necessity. The Rent Controller framed the following two issues in this behalf: