AMROO Vs. SHRI HARI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE landlord -petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order of the Appellate Authority, Jullundur dated March 27, 1978 whereby the order of the Rent Controller directing the ejectment of the respondent was set aside.

(2.) THE landlord -petitioner sought the ejectment of his tenant inter alia on the ground that he required the premises for his own use and occupation. It was further pleaded that he has not vacated any house in the urban area of Jullundur Cantt. without any sufficient cause nor he is in occupation of any other house except the portion in his possession. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenant -respondent these allegations were not specifically denied. Itt was stated that this para of the ejectment application is incorrect and hence denied. On the pleading of the parties the learned Rent Controller framed the following issues : - 1. Whether the applicant requires the demised premises for his own use and occupation bonafide ? 2. Whether the respondent has materially impaired the value and utility of the demised premises ?

(3.) WHETHER the applicant has served a valid notice of termination of tenancy ?