RAKESH KUMAR Vs. RAHUL BANSAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Eviction of the petitioner-tenant was ordered on 12.10.2011 by the Rent Controller as grounds of non-payment of arrears of rent as also of personal necessity were adjudicated against him. The Appellate Authority under the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Appellate Authority) affirmed the adjudication made by the Rent Controller on all counts and thus, concurrent findings returned by the Appellate Authority sealed the fate of the tenant against eviction.

(2.) Plea of the petitioner-tenant that all the issues were not decided by the Rent Controller and were not properly dealt with even by the Appellate Authority causing great prejudice to the tenant, is clearly misfounded. Following issues were framed by the Rent Controller:

(3.) Issues No.1 and 2-A were discussed together and after detailed discussion, were adjudicated against the tenant; whereas issue No.2 was dealt with separately but was again decided against the tenant. Petition of the landlord sequelly had succeeded when eviction was ordered and tenant was called upon to deliver vacant possession of the property in dispute within two months of the order of the Rent Controller. The Appellate Authority also did not omit to discuss any of the issues mentioned earlier and findings of the Rent Controller after detailed discussion of argument of counsel for the parties on all the issues, were affirmed. Claim of the tenant that the authorities below had dealt with the matter very casually without going deep into the merits of all the issues, is devoid of any merit.