AMRIT LAL Vs. SHAKUNTALA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMRIT Lal petitioner is in occupation of the house situate in Bazar Thathiram, Jandiala Guru, Tehsil and District Amritsar, as a tenant at Rs. 11 (Rs. 20) per month and the same is owned by Shakuntala Rani respondent. The respondent purchased the house vide sale-deed registered dated April 19, 1977, and filed a petition for ejectment of the petitioner there-from on the grounds of non-payment of rent @ Rs. 20 per month and personal requirement in November, 1978.

(2.) THE arrears of rent was tendered on the first date of hearing. The petitioner contested that the rent of the house was Rs. 20 pet month. According to him, he was in occupation of the house as a tenant at Rs. 10 per month. He tendered the arrears @ Rs. 10 per month. He also denied that the house was required by the respondent for her personal occupation.

(3.) A .W. Raj Kumari is a witness of the respondent. She stated that Mulkh Raj husband of respondent was living as a tenant in her building at the rate of Rs. 50 per month. The respondent has six sons and three daughters. The house in occupation of the husband of the respondent consists of four rooms. She wants to get that building vacated from the husband of the respondent and she asked him to vacate the same. The accommodation consisting of four rooms is insufficient for the family of the respondent. In her cross-examination, she stated that she is living in another building. She did not issue any receipt for the rent received from the husband of the respondent. She has not served any notice on Mulkh Raj to vacate her house. A.W. Girdhari Lal is the brother of Mulkh Raj. He stated that the respondent or her husband does not own any another building except the one in dispute in Jandiala Guru. The respondent herself appeared as witness. She stated that the landlady of the house where she was living had asked them to vacate it. This house consists of four rooms. In her cross-examination, she stated that she would not like to evict the petitioner if he increases the rent of the house to Rs. 50 per month. A.W. Mulkh Raj is the husband of the respondent. He stated that the accommodation already in their occupation is insufficient and it consists of four rooms. The house in dispute consists of two rooms only.