HARI CHAND Vs. DHARAM PAL BHAMBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition was filed for the ejectment of the tenant on a number of grounds which were all negatived by the Rent Controller as well as the Appellate Authority. The only ground pressed before me by the landlord petitioner is that of personal necessity. The authorities below have found that the ground floor of the premises in dispute is being used for running a factory from the very inception of the tenancy and the first floor for the residence of the tenant. On these facts the demised premises would be non-residential premises within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the Haryana Urban Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1973. It is not disputed that non-residential building cannot be got vacated for personal necessity. So far as the concurrent finding that the building is non-residential building is concerned, no illegality or infirmity could be pointed out and the same, therefore, would be binding in revision. This petition consequently has no merit and is hereby dismissed. No costs.