BAL KISHAN Vs. SAT PARKASH SOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge here is to the order of ejectment passed against the tenant on the ground that the landlord required the premises for his personal use and occupation.

(2.) THE demised premises are part of a double story building situated in Anaz Mandi, Sirhind. They consist of two rooms, a kitchen and a bath room besides a court-yard. The remaining portion of the building, namely a room and shop on the ground floor and two rooms on the first floor being in the possession of Kishan Dev, the nephew of the landlord and his son Anil Kumar. It has come on record that Kishan Dev and Anil Kumar are in occupation of this accomodation merely on a care taker basis. It being specifically stated by Kishan Dev that they were not in occupation either as tenant or licencee. This being so, counsel for the petitioner rightly contended that the landlord must be deemed to be in constructive possession of this portion or, in other words, occupation of this portion by Kishan Dev and Anil Kumar must be deemed to be for and on behalf of the landlord.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY, the landlord Sat Parkash Sood is an old resident of Bombay where he was in business. Ejectment of the tenant was sought by him on the ground that he had suffered a heart attack in 1982, as a result of which he lost his business too and had to close it down and on this account he now needs the demised premises to shift for permanent residence at Sirhind.