AMAR CHAND Vs. SMT. VIDYA WATI & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions (Civil Revision Nos. 2985 and 2986 of 1979) filed under Section 15, Sub-section (5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by two tenants against the same landlords, whose eviction from the demised premises has been ordered by the appellate authority on the same ground, that is, personal requirement of the landlords, are being disposed of through this common order on account of identical nature of the contentions raised.

(2.) The petitioner are in occupation of two portions of the same building which were initially rented out to them by Ved Prakash, predecessor-in-interest of the respondent-landlord who died on February 3, 1974. But for Smt. Vidya Wati who is the wife, the other seven respondents are sons and daughters of Ved Prakash deceased.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the conclusion of the appellate authority to the effect that the landlords are in bonafide need of the premises in question for their personal use and occupation, stands vitiated as the evidence on record has not been approached and appreciated from a correct angle and some of the conclusions and findings recorded by the said authority rather disprove the case of the landlords.