GIRWAR SINGH Vs. JAI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant has filed the present petition challenging the order 23.2.2012, passed by the appellate authority, whereby he has been directed to be evicted from the premises in dispute.

(2.) The petitioner is a tenant in half portion of the premises in question, namely, 15' x 20', which is part of Industrial Shed No. 930, Phase II, Industrial Area, U.T., Chandigarh. It was taken on rent on 17.12.1984 @ Rs. 350/- per month which, as is evident from the pleadings, was increased to Rs. 750/- per month. The eviction was sought on the ground of non-payment of rent and bonafide personal necessity of the landlord and his sons. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the eviction petition, whereas in appeal, the order passed by the Rent Controller was set aside and eviction of the petitioner from the premises in dispute was directed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the ground on which eviction of the petitioner has been directed is the personal necessity of the landlord. It has been pleaded by the respondent-landlord that two of his sons are already carrying on business in part of the premises in dispute and eviction of the petitioner has been sought on the ground that the same is required for expansion, however, no evidence to that effect has been led. In fact, the respondent or his sons are not carrying on the business of the kind claimed in the premises in dispute, hence, there is no question of expansion.