HARKIRAT KAUR Vs. HARVINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 15.01.2014, whereby, application moved by respondent No. 1 for leave to contest the ejectment petition, was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had sought ejectment of the tenant under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short 'Act') as applicable to U.T., Chandigarh. Petitioner was only required to establish that he was a Non-Resident Indian and was owner of the premises in question.

(2.) In the present case, petitioner has sought ejectment of respondent No. 1 under Section 13-B of the Act. Respondent No. 1 moved an application for leave to contest the petition on the ground that there was no relationship between the parties. In fact, it was averred by the petitioner that Sukhjinder Singh Sodhi had sublet the premises in question to respondent No. 1 and it was further pleaded that petitioner was not the owner of the premises in question.

(3.) The Apex Court in 'Rachpal Singh and others v. Gurmit Kaur and others, 2009 2 RCR(Rent) 112' has held as under:-