SUMITRA DEVI Vs. PARVEEN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard through video conferencing.

(2.) The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 18/11/2016 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Rent Controller, Pathankot dismissing the amendment application filed by the landlady-petitioner.

(3.) Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that in July 2013 the landlady-petitioner filed an ejectment application under the provisions of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 against the tenant-respondent seeking his eviction from the shop in dispute. The grounds for eviction raised were non-payment of rent since July 2012 and bonafide need and requirement. According to the landlady-petitioner the shop was needed for the requirement of her daughter, Mrs. Jeevan Jyoti Kaur, who had become a widow at a young age and was living with her mother and intended to open a beauty parlour. The tenant-respondent filed a reply and contested the ejectment application.