DAVINDER KUMAR SETHI Vs. BABU RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-tenant is impugning the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below i.e. Rent Controller and Appellate Authority, Ferozepur vide which he was ordered to be evicted from the demised shop (as detailed in para 2 of the judgment of the Rent Controller). Parties to the lis hereinafter shall be referred to by their original positions in the rent petition.

(2.) The landlady filed eviction petition under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short,'the Act') on the grounds (i) that the tenant had failed to pay the arrears of rent from July, 2011 till date and had also not paid the house tax as well as the water tax charges despite her repeated requests to him (ii) that the landlady required the shop for the necessity of her son Kushal Pal, aged 23 years, who after completing his diploma in Computer Engineering had been unable to secure any job. Hence, the landlady wanted to settle him by setting up a shop of computer and mobile accessories, so that he could not only earn his livelihood but also maintain himself as well as his mother i.e. the landlady. Besides this, it was also averred by the landlady that she did not own or possess any other suitable place in the area concerned nor had she vacated any such premises in the urban area of Ferozepur City.

(3.) On the other hand, the tenant opposed the eviction petition on the ground that requirement pleaded by the landlady was neither genuine nor bonafide. The tenant also took an objection that the rent petition was not maintainable as the landlady had not pleaded the necessary requirement of Sec. 13(3)(a)(ii) of the Act.