JAWAHAR LAL Vs. PIARE LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is landlord's revision petition whose ejectment application was allowed by the Rent Controller, but dismissed in appeal.

(2.) THE landlords sought the ejectment of the tenant Piare Lal from the house, in dispute, inter alia on the ground that they bonafide required the premises for their use and occupation. It was also pleaded that the accommodation consisting of one room in their possession was insufficient for their needs. It was also pleaded that they were not occupying any other residential building in the area concerned and had also not vacated any such building after the commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. In the written statement, the tenant denied the allegation that the landlords required the premises, in dispute, for their use and occupation. The Rent Controller came to the conclusion that the landlords bonafide required the same for their use and occupation and consequently, the eviction order was passed against the tenant. In appeal the learned Appellate Authority reversed the said finding of the Rent Controller. Though it was found by the Appellate Authority that the accommodation in possession of the landlords was insufficient yet it was also observed that they were in possession of another residential house which they had sold some eight years ago and this fact was not disclosed by the landlords in their ejectment application. In view of that finding, the ejectment order was set aside. Dissatisfied with the same, the landlords have filed this revision petition in this Court.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find force in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners.