PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. ENDER PAL SINGH SAHOTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 1 1.6.2010 of Rent controller, Phillaur, whereby while rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for grant of leave to contest a petition filed under section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), his eviction has been ordered from the demised premises.

(2.) The respondent-landlord filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for ejectment of the petitioner from the demised premises claiming himself to be an NRI and co-owner to the extent of half share of the demised premises making further averments that there exists a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and he wants to now settle in India and spend his remaining life in the mother land and for this purpose he wants to start business in the premises in dispute, and thus is in bonafide need of the same.

(3.) The petitioner filed an application for leave to defend on the ground that provisions of section 13-B of the Act, were not applicable in the present case, as the respondent-landlord was not an NRI and owner of the suit property. It was further averred that he does not require the premises in dispute and wants to re-let the same at higher rate of rent. It was further stated that service of notice as per the prescribed procedure have not been effected upon the petitioner and the present petition was misuse of the provisions of law. The respondent landlord is not in need of the premises in dispute as he has no intention to return to India.