RAKESH SONDHI Vs. RAMESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Application is allowed as prayed for and copy of impugned order dtd. 24/10/2016 passed by Rent Controller, Mukerian is taken on record subject to all just exceptions.Main case

(2.) Instant revision petition has been preferred by the petitionerlandlord to impugn the orders dtd. 24/10/2016 passed by Rent Controller, Mukerian and 18/11/2021 passed by Addl. District Judge-cum-Appellate Authority, Hoshiarpur vide which his petition under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') for the ejectment of the respondent-tenant from the shop in dispute was dismissed.

(3.) In the petition filed by the petitioner-landlord under Sec. 13 of the Act, the petitioner claimed that he was the exclusive owner of the demised shop, which had fallen to his exclusive share in family settlement. His father had rented out the demised shop to the father of the respondenttenant @ Rs.500.00 per month in the year 1996. After the death of his father, the respondent-tenant had inherited the tenancy of demised shop at the rate of Rs.900.00 per month. The petitioner-landlord claimed that he was a qualified doctor, who was based and settled at Gurgaon where he had been practicing since the year 1996. However, he now wanted to shift back to his native place at Talwara and set up a clinic in the demised shop. Resultantly, he had asked the respondent-tenant many times to vacate and hand over the demised shop but in vain. Hence, he was left with no other option but to file the rent petition in question.