HARBANS LAL Vs. JAGDISH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant is the petitioner before this Court.

(2.) LANDLORD Jagdish Singh sought the eviction of tenant Harbans Lal from the demised premises. It was pleaded that the house in dispute had fallen to his share in an oral family settlement. It was further pleaded that he was working and employed at Tata Nagar, Jamshedpur for the last many years but his services had been declared surplus and as such he wanted to settle at Majitha and as such required the demised premises for his personal use and occupation. It was claimed that he had no other property anywhere in India except the house in question nor he had vacated any premises after the commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. The ejectment was also sought on the ground of non-payment of rent with effect from June 1, 1984 by the tenant.

(3.) SINCE the arrears of rent were paid by the tenant on the first date of hearing, therefore, the aforesaid ground of ejectment was rendered infructuous.