LAWS(P&H)-2003-4-110

K.R. CHOPRA Vs. MANJIT INDER KAUR

Decided On April 07, 2003
K.R. Chopra Appellant
V/S
Manjit Inder Kaur Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT revision petition is by the tenant challenging the orders of ejectment passed by the Appellate Authority on the ground that the demised premises are required for bona fide use and occupation of the respondent landlady.

(2.) RESPONDENT landlady filed an ejectment petition on 15.11.1985 for the ejectment of the tenant of the first floor of the house situated at Ludhiana. The ejectment was inter-alia sought on the record (ground ?) that the demised premises are required for bona fide use of the landlady and her family members. It was submitted that her husband Dr. G.K. Athwal was an employee of National Fertilizer Ltd., Naya Nangal who died on 26.10.1984 as a result of an accident. The landlady and her family members including her two unmarried daughters were permitted to stay in the company's house till 25.2.1985 and that she had to shift to Ludhiana in her own house by that date. She was in occupation of 6 kanal residential bungalow, consisting of 4 bed-rooms, one worship room, 1 store apart from bath room and verandah etc. It may be stated the ground floor was on rent with another tenant which became available to the landlady and she occupied the same. It was the case of the landlady that both of her daughters are highly educated and her family is accustomed from the very beginning to a special mode of life. It was stated that the husband of the petitioner having died, one of the daughters being yet unmarried the landlady has to depend upon her parents to live with her at Ludhiana, especially when there is no other male member. They cannot permanently shift to her house unless separate adequate accommodation to them is provided for. It was also submitted that she requires separate room for her married daughter and/or for her husband. It was also stated that the other daughter is waiting for licence to practice as an Advocate at Ludhiana. She also alleged that they always had independent room to keep Guru Granth Sahib for daily prayers and worship and that the petitioner and other members of her family need separate room for study and for guests.

(3.) THE respondent while controventing the allegations also raised a preliminary objection that the ejectment petition is not maintainable as he is tenant of the entire first floor, its terrace and the garage located on the ground floor of the building. The landlady denied such averments in the replication.