NIRMAL SINGH Vs. KULDIP RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is landlord's revision directed against the orders of the Authorities below dismissing bis petition for ejectment on the ground of personal necessity. According to the petitioner, the wife of the petitioner, Smt. Kulwant Kaur, is stated to be the owner of House No. 5-C, Fairland Colony, Fatehgarh Road, Amritsar. The building is alleged to be residential one and out of this, one room was rented out to the respondent at a rent of Rs. 500/-per month. Ejectment was sought on the ground that he has failed to pay the arrears of rent,. w. e. f 1-6-1982 to 28-2-1983, as well as on the ground that the room in occupation of the respondent is required for use and occupation by the family members of the petitioner.

(2.) THE ejectment petition was contested by the tenant, who in his written statement admitted that Smt. Kulwant Kaur, wife of the petitioner, is the owner of the property. He therefore, denied that there was any relationship of landlord and tenant between the petitioner and the respondent. The rent was claimed to be Rs. 100/- per month and not Rs. 500/- per month as alleged by the petitioner. The respondent denied that the property is residential one. He rather took up the plea that the property is a non-residential property, which is situated in a commercial area. He further stated that the property comprises three shops on the ground floor which are occupied by various tenants and one of the said shops is in occupation of the tenant. The tenancy was claimed to have commenced on 15-12-1981.

(3.) THE Rent Controller on the appreciation of entire evidence on record, found relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties ; the rent was held to be Rs. 500/- per month and the ground of personal necessity was found to be not available to the landlord as the room in possession of the respondent was held to be shop which was let out for running the business and trade. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate Authority. The respondent also filed cross objections on the issue of relationship of landlord and tenant. The appeal as well as the cross objections were dismissed and the finding of the Rent Controller on these counts was affirmed. The petitioner has impugned the orders of the Authorities below by way of this present revision petition.