SUNBEAM TRADERS Vs. URMIL RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners(tenants) are in revision under Section 18-A(8)of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949(hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the impugned order dated 17.12.2010, passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby, petition filed by respondent (landlady) under Section 13-A of the Act, has been accepted and consequently, application for leave to contest filed by the petitioners was dismissed.

(2.) In brief, facts of the case are that respondent(landlady) claimed herself to be owner of House no.224, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh (demised premises), which she states to have purchased along with her husband and two sons vide registered sale deed dated 30.03.2010. It was averred in the petition that she is owner to the extent of 20% and the remaining share is owned by her husband as well as her sons. On the basis of this sale deed, premises stands in the name of respondent, her husband and their two sons.

(3.) It was also stated that at the time of the purchase of house in question, it was occupied by the petitioners(tenants) at a monthly rent of Rs.700/- per month and thus, by virtue of execution of sale deed by the previous owners, she along with her family has become the owner-cum-landlord of the demised premises. Ejectment application was filed by the respondent(landlady) on the ground that she is due to retire from service on 28.02.2011 as a lecturer in History and is posted at Government College for Girls, Sector 11, Chandigarh on deputation basis. It was also averred by respondent (landlady) that she is at present living with her husband in a government house no.514, Sector 16-B, Chandigarh since 2005 and her husband is also due to retire on 31.07.2010. Thus, the present ejectment application was preferred under Section 13-A of the Act for eviction of the premises for her own use and occupation.