KUNDAN LAL Vs. BHAGWAN DASS AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions (Civil Revisions Nos. 391 and 642 of 1960) have arisen out of an application for the ejectment of a tenant from rented premises on the ground that the premises were required by the landlords for their own personal use. There was also a ground regarding the non -payment of rent, but this is no longer in issue.

(2.) THE premises consist of a two storeyed building of which the lower storey is a shop and the upper storey is described as balakhana. The premises in the original instance belonged to one Raunaq Ram and were then purchased by Bhagwan Das and Amarjit who are two brothers. Kundan Lal, the Petitioner in Civil Revision No. 391 of 1960, had leased these premises from the original owner, Raunaq Ram, and after the sale he continued to remain in possession as tenant under the new owners. The lease was for a period of one year, but before the expiry of that year Bhagwan Das and Amarjit brought an application for ejectment on the ground that they required the premises for their own use. The application was resisted on a number of grounds, but the main ground was that the premises were not required for personal use and that they were non -residential premises and, therefore, the ground upon which the owners had based their application was not available to them. It was found by the trial Court that part of the premises were business premises and part residential, the lower storey being held to be non -residential and the upper residential. The Rent Controller accordingly gave an order of ejectment in respect of the upper storey but not in respect of ground -floor. Both parties were aggrieved by this order and went up in appeal to the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority affirmed the order of the Rent Controller and dismissed both the appeals. The finding that the premises were required by one of the landlords for his own personal use was also affirmed.

(3.) WITH regard to the first argument, my attention has been drawn to the proviso to Section 13(3)(a) (iv) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act which is in the following terms: