SANT KUMAR Vs. R S VIRK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of two revision petitions i.e. CR Nos.1311 and 1329 of 2011 as the same have arisen out of similar facts and common questions of law on similar grounds have been raised in both these petitions. However, for convenience sake, facts are being taken from CR No.1311 of 2011.

(2.) It may also be relevant to mention that in both these petitions, the eviction of the petitioners have been ordered from the demised premises on the ground of personal necessity of the respondent-landlord by the Authorities below.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 filed the ejectment applications against the petitioners making averments that the petitioner along with one Darshan Lal son of Shri Mehar Chand were jointly inducted as tenants in the shop in question for a period of 11 months w.e.f. 1.7.1984 to 31.5.1985, at the rate of Rs. 1300/- per month vide unregistered rent deed dated 3.6.1984. Subsequently, Darshan Lal retired from the said partnership and Sant Kumar-petitioner No.1 is continuing to occupy the shop in question and is running his business by describing the same as Vandana Saree Emporium (petitioner No.2). The respondentlandlord further averred that he being co-owner/landlord has filed the ejectment petition in his individual capacity having bona fide requirement of the shop in question for his own business of running a coaching institute for aspiring law students besides his own office to give legal advice to the clients on any matter pertaining to their legal problems in the field of law in the demised premises after his retirement from service, which is situated in a prominent commercial locality. It was further averred that after retirement, he wants to settle at Yamuna Nagar, as his native village Chhachhrauli is situated at a distance of 16 kilometers from Yamuna Nagar. He has also practiced as an Advocate in the Courts at Jagadhri before joining the service. He has neither occupied any commercial building in the urban area of Jagadhri or Yamuna Nagar nor has ever vacated any such building without sufficient cause after commencement of the Act. It was pleaded that though he would have right to seek such eviction by resorting to section 13-A (1-A) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rent Act') , one year prior to his superannuation, yet this petition has been filed as he is entitled to anticipate his requirement in a reasonably foreseeable future. Thus, a prayer for eviction of petitioner from the shop in question was made with a direction to hand over its vacant possession to him by 31.3.2011 so that he may make necessary arrangements in time to start his business immediately upon his superannuation on 31.8.2011.