JIA LAL Vs. VIDYA PARKASH DHIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's revision petition against the order of the lower appellate authority whereby his appeal against the order of the Rent Controller was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the respondent sought eviction of the petitioner on the ground (i) that he is in arrears of rent from 1. 7. 1983 onwards; (ii) that the respondent-landlord requires the premises in dispute for himself and for his married son who is also blessed with two daughters. He wants to separate them as they are not pulling on well with his wife. Pursuant to the notice issued by the Rent Controller the petitioner put in appearance and filed the written statement. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :-

(3.) SINCE the tenant tendered the arrears of rent on the first date of hearing, issue No. 1 was not pressed by the landlord and so was decided against him. Under issue No. 2, Rent Controller on the basis of evidence on record came to the conclusion that the landlord requires the premises in dispute for his personal bona fide need and for the personal bona fide need of his family and so ordered the eviction of the tenant, vide order dated 18. 11. 1986. However, the tenant was granted two months time to vacate the. premises. Before the appellate Court, the matter was once again examined on facts as well as law. Counsel for the respondent-tenant urged that it is proved on record that the landlord had two sons and two daughters, one son and his family are living in one house and they are in possession of four rooms besides kitchen, bath room and a court-yard. Since their children are married and are living far away, the present accommodation with the landlord sufficiently meets his need and so the present application is an attempt to get the premises vacated and thereafter to let it out to another tenant at the enhanced rate of rent. The appellate authority on careful perusal of evidence on record found no merit in the contention of the appellant. The appellate authority came to the conclusion that there is unrebutted evidence on record that relation between daughter in-law and mother-in-law is. in fact, not cordial. It also found as a fact that the landlord requires the build-in genuinely for his own occupation and for his son, this way agreeing with the finding of the Rent Controller found the application without merit and consequently dismissed the same.