ROHTASH KUMAR Vs. AMAR KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.

(2.) By this order, CR-933-2018 and CR-2559-2018 (filed by the tenants and the landlady respectively) shall stand disposed of.

(3.) The landlady has sought eviction of the tenants on the grounds of non-payment of rent, causing damage to the tenanted premises, the premises remained locked for a period of more than 10 years and also on bona fide requirement of her grand daughters for running business. The petitioner's son (the father of the grand daughters) has already died. The tenants contested the petition. The Rent Controller dismissed the petition on 31/8/2015, however, the Appellate Authority, on re-appreciation of the evidence, has held that although the landlady has failed to prove the grounds of eviction with respect to the non-payment of rent, damage to the tenanted premises due to material alterations and that the tenanted premises remained unoccupied for a period of 10 years, however, found merit in the plea of bona fide requirement of the landlady. Thus, the tenants have assailed the correctness of judgment passed by the Appellate Authority whereas the landlady through her legal representatives has assailed the correctness of the findings arrived at by the Appellate Authority with respect to the failure to prove the other grounds of eviction.