LAWS(P&H)-2011-9-69

ANIL KUMAR Vs. JAI PAL PURI THROUGH LRS

Decided On September 08, 2011
ANIL KUMAR Appellant
V/S
Jai Pal Puri Through Lrs Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition against the judgment dated 25.8.2006 passed by Sh. Kuldeep Jain, Appellate Authority, Kurukshetra, vide which the appeal preferred by the tenants against the judgment dated 6.12.2005 passed by Mrs. Vivek Bharti, Rent Controller, Kurukshetra, was dismissed.

(2.) The landlord filed eviction petition with the averments that earlier Om Parkash father of respondents, was tenant and after his death, present petitioners are in possession of the shop as tenants. The petitioners have not paid the rent since 1.8.2000 at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month plus house tax and they are liable to be ejected on the ground of non-payment of rent. The landlord has also pleaded that there is bona fide personal requirement of the premises for the use of his three un-employed sons, namely, Devender Puri, Ravinder Puri and Raman Puri, who are matriculate and intend to do business. They intend to start the vegetable shop for which they have sufficient money. The landlord and his sons are not occupying any other shop in the urban area and have not vacated the building without sufficient cause after the commencement of 1949 Act. The landlord has further pleaded that earlier on the ground of bona fide necessity eviction petition was filed which was dismissed on technical grounds, against which the revision petition is pending in the High Court. Now, the personal necessity has increased as his other two sons are also unemployed. The petitioner alongwith his three sons intends to start joint business of vegetable shop. Petitioner requested the tenants to hand over the vacant possession of the shop in question to him, but they refused. Hence the petition.

(3.) Notice of the petition was given to the respondents, who filed the joint written statement raising number of preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, locus standi, abuse of process of Court, concealment of material facts. It is also pleaded that the present petition operates as res judicata as earlier petition on the ground of personal necessity has been dismissed.