RAMESHWAR DASS Vs. HARBANS SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that petitioner Harbans Singh, aged 54 years son of late Sh.Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh, temporarily staying at House No.1348, Phase - 3B2, Mohali had filed a petition under Sec. 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against respondent/tenant Rameshwar Dass son of Rikhi Ram, resident of SCF No.1, Sector 27-C, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the demised premises).

(2.) Inter alia in the petition, the petitioner had contended that originally the demised premises were jointly owned by Surjit Singh and late Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh, both sons of late Naranjan Singh in equal shares; the respondent was inducted as a tenant in the demised premises on 8/9/1978 vide a rent note on payment of Rs.1,100.00 per month as rent; the respondent had increased the rent to Rs.10,000.00 per month of his own since May, 2013; however, about a month before filing of the petition (the petition was filed on 19/12/2014), the rent was increased to Rs.10,400.00 per month, which was being paid through cheque; that late Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh expired on 28/9/2008 at Delhi and petitioner is his son; Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh had executed a Will dtd. 26/6/1998 in favour of the petitioner bequeathing the ownership rights in the demised premises to the petitioner, as such after death of late Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh, the petitioner became owner of the demised premises to the extent of rights of late Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh and necessary entry in that regard has been made in the record of Estate Office, Chandigarh; the petitioner is a Non-Resident Indian (hereinafter referred to as NRI) and is joint owner of the property in question for the last more than 5 years; he has decided to return to India to settle here permanently and in order to earn his livelihood, the petitioner intends to open a grocery shop in the demised premises after getting it vacated from the respondent.

(3.) Notice of the petition was given to respondent/tenant, who put in appearance and filed an application seeking leave to contest the petition stating that respondent/tenant had come in occupation of the demised premises in the year 1978 through Sh.Niranjan Singh son of Cheta Singh, initially on payment of Rs.1,100.00 per month as rent, which was increased from time to time; the respondent/tenant has never paid any rent to Harbans Singh or Harbhajan Singh, therefore, there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between him and the petitioner; the demised premises are owned by Surjit Singh and Harbhajan Singh, whereas the present petition has been filed by Harbans Singh son of Pajan Singh. According to the respondent, Harbans Singh is not son of Harbhajan Singh but is son of Pajan Singh and he has invented a devise to file the present petition as Harbans Singh son of Harbhajan Singh @ Pajan Singh. Therefore, the petition be dismissed.