JOGINDER KAUR CHANNA Vs. DINESH BHATIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 13.8.2013 whereby application moved by the respondents for leave to contest the ejectment petition filed by the petitioner, was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application for leave to contest the ejectment petition was liable to be dismissed as there was no such requirement under Section 13B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 ('the Act' for short) that in case, where there was a dispute qua relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, the tenant could be allowed to contest the ejectment petition.

(2.) The Apex Court in Rachpal Singh and others v. Gurmit Kaur and others, 2009 3 RCR(Civ) 786 has held as under:-

(3.) In the present case, petitioner has filed the ejectment petition under Section 13B of the Act on the ground that she was a non-resident Indian and required the premises in question for her personal use and occupation. Respondents filed an application seeking permission to contest the ejectment petition. The case of the respondents was that the premises in question had been rented out by Swaran Kaur to the father of respondents at monthly rent of Rs. 300/-. Hence, there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Since the tenant has disputed the factum of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, it can be said that triable issue arises in this case and the Rent Controller rightly granted permission to respondents to contest the ejectment petition. No ground for interference is made out.