AMARJIT SINGH Vs. GURCHARAN SINGH MINHAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is tenant's revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 22.2.2013 of the Rent Controller, Jalandhar whereby his application for grant of leave to defend has been rejected in a petition filed under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act') by the respondent-landlord.

(2.) The respondent claiming himself a non-resident Indian and landlord of the demised premises sought eviction of the petitioner under Section 13-B of the Act submitting that he fulfills all the necessary ingredients to get benefit under the aforesaid provisions.

(3.) Upon service, the petitioner and proforma respondents No. 2 to 6 appeared before the Rent Controller and filed an application seeking grant of leave to defend alleging that the respondent-landlord was not entitled to the benefits of Section 13-B of the Act as he did not fulfill the conditions as prescribed under the law being a Canadian citizen. It was further submitted that the respondent-landlord has filed another petition under Section 13-B of the Act earlier also and therefore, the present petition was not maintainable. A further ground was taken that one single petition regarding two independent tenancies is not maintainable as only one shop was rented out to Dr. Diwan Singh (predecessor in interest of the petitioner) whereas other shop was independently let out to one Amarjit Singh vide separate lease deed. It was also submitted that the respondent-landlord did not require the demised premises for his personal use and occupation as he has no intention to settle in India and therefore, the need of the respondent-landlord was not bona fide. A further submission was made that the demised premises consist of very small area and will be of no use to the respondent-landlord as he will not be able to utilize the same for his business.