MEENA ARORA Vs. SUDARSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a tenant's revision against the orders passed by both the Authorities ordering her eviction under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (Rent Act).

(2.) As per the landlord-respondent he is the owner/landlord of the house in question. The tenant-petitioner was inducted as a tenant on the second floor from 1/8/2006 at a monthly rent of Rs.1500.00 per month with an increase of 10% every year. The tenancy was oral. It was pleaded that the two children of the petitioner are married and his family has expanded and accommodation with him is insufficient and he needs the accommodation for his personal use to accommodate himself, his children along with their spouses. The ground of non-payment of rent was also raised. The tenant-petitioner contested the ejectment application and filed a written statement taking the plea that the landlord-respondent was not the owner of the property in question, the tenant-petitioner was being pressurized by two persons who were claiming rent from her - one was the landlord-respondent and the other was one Mr. Tirth also known as Harcharan Singh. It was averred that the landlord-respondent had not approached the Court with clean hands and had suppressed material facts and that the ejectment application was a counter blast to a civil suit filed by the tenant-petitioner. respondent which is pending and present petition is bad for non joinder of necessary parties. No replication was filed.

(3.) From the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed by the Rent Controller :