MALWINDER SINGH Vs. S L MAINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant has come up in revision against the order of the Appellate Authority affirming on appeal that of the Rent Controller whereby his eviction was ordered from the demised premises.

(2.) THE facts :-Shri S. L. Maini, respondent/landlord (hereinafter the landlord) is owner of House No. 1128, Sector 15-B, Chandigarh; that he was Chief Engineer in the Public Health Department, Punjab, with headquarters at Patiala ; that he was to retire from Government service on April 30, 1987 ; that ground-floor of House No. 1128, Sector 15-B, Chandigarh (hereinafter the demised premises) was rented out to the petitioner/tenant (hereinafter the tenant) on January 26, 1983 for a period of eleven months at a monthly rent of Rs. 1100/- excluding water and electricity charges ; that agreement of lease was executed by the tenant on January 26, 1983; that the tenant was serving as Executive Engineer in the Public Health" Department, where the landlord was serving as a Chief Engineer ; that the landlord sought eviction of the tenant from the demised premises on the ground that the accommodation in his possession on the first floor was" insufficient for him ; that the same was under the tenancy of Shri O. P. Manocha, who vacated it at the asking of the landlord since he had to take up residence there ; that the landlord is not in possession/occupation of any other residential accommodation either at Chandigarh or at any other place in Punjab and had not vacated any such building without sufficient cause after the enforcement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (the Act, for brevity); that the landlord suffered from heart ailment and had undergone open heart surgery in U. S. A. on May 31, 1988 and had been advised not to climb the stairs; that his wife was also a heart patient; that his son Niraj Maini, who was posted as Sub-Divisional Officer, P. W. D. Irrigation, at Sangrur had been transferred to Rajpura in July, 1988 and now he has been transferred to Chandigarh ; that the wife and child of Niraj Maini had shifted to Chandigarh and had taken up the residence with the landlord; that his other son, namely, Vipin Maini, who was residing at Patiala and set up business there had to leave that place and had taken residence at Chandigarh because of spurt in terrorists activities since it was not safe to live at Patiala.

(3.) THE tenant joined issue with the landlord regarding his personal necessity. He pleaded that the landlord had constructed a house at Patiala and was living in House No. 140, Civil Lines, Passi Road, Patiala and after his retirement the first floor of the house in dispute was rented out to one Bahadur and that the landlord has huge Government accommodation at Patiala.