RAM PAUL Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's revision petition challenging the judgment dated 21.10.2011 passed by the Appellate Authority, whereby while accepting the appeal against the order dated 19.12.2008 of the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, eviction of the petitioner has been ordered from the demised premises on the ground of personal necessity of the respondent-landlord.

(2.) Respondent-Landlord Piara Lal (since deceased) sought ejectment of the petitioner on various grounds including that of personal necessity of the landlord. The Rent Controller, vide order dated 19.12.2008, dismissed the ejectment petition holding that the respondent has failed to prove his case. However, the respondentlandlord filed an appeal against the aforesaid order and the same was accepted vide order dated 21.10.2011 of the Appellate Authority on the ground that demised premises is required by the landlord for his bonafide personal necessity and the petitioner was directed to hand over vacant possession of the shop in dispute to the Legal Representatives of appellant-Piara Lal.

(3.) The petitioner-tenant has challenged the aforesaid judgment dated 21.10.2011 on the ground that in the ejectment petition, the respondent-landlord has nowhere pleaded that the demised shop is needed for settling his two sons who are earning their livelihood by ironing the clothes on a cart, as stated by him in the examination inchief. It is further case of the petitioner that in the cross-examination of Dharam Pal son of Piara Lal, he has admitted that another shop was lying vacant prior to the filing of eviction petition; however, the aforesaid fact has not been mentioned in the eviction petition and thus, the landlord has concealed material facts from the knowledge of the Court, which has disentitled him to the relief claimed. Moreover, the landlord has failed to plead necessary ingredients for eviction of the ground of personal necessity. It is further case of the petitioner that in view of the aforesaid facts, the need of the landlord cannot be held to be genuine, real and honest; and thus, the instant revision petition be accepted and the impugned judgment of the Appellate Authority be set aside while dismissing the eviction petition of the respondent-landlord.