DARSHAN SINGH Vs. JAGDISH KUMAR AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition for revision is directed against the decision of the Appellate Authority, reversing on appeal the decision of the Rent Controller rejecting the landlord's application for eviction of the tenant.

(2.) The landlord claimed eviction on the ground that he required the premises for his personal residence and the residence of his family members In the application it was stated that the landlord had no other residential building in the municipal area, but it was not stated that he had not vacated such a building without sufficient cause after the commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. The Rent Controller did not accept the stand of the landlord that he required the premises for his own use or the use of his family members and rejected the application. On appeal, the Appellate Authority accepted the contention of the landlord that he required the premises for his own use and that of his family members, and reversed the decision of the Rent Controller, and allowed the eviction. The tenant being dissatisfied has come in revision to this court.

(3.) Mr. Chawla, learned counsel for the tenant, has argued that in order to get the benefit of section 13(2) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, three ingredients have to he satisfied, namely :-