LAL CHAND Vs. AMAR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMAR Chand Respondent is the landlord of the house in dispute situate within the municipal limits of Tanda Urmar, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur and Lal Chand Petitioner is in occupation thereof as a tenant @ Rs. 10/ - per month. The respondent filed an ejectment application against the Petitioner on the grounds that he required it for personal use and that the petitioner had impaired the value and utility thereof.

(2.) THE Petitioner contested the application filed by the Respondent alleging that Daulat Ram, grand -father of the Respondent, had let out the house to him and after his death, Mulkh Raj father of the Respondent came to own it. The Respondent and his father wanted to dispossess him from the house and with this end in view he was compelled to execute the rent note dated 12th January, 1978 in favour of the Respondent. It was denied that the Respondent required the premises for his personal use and occupation.

(3.) AMAR Chand respondent appeared as a witness for himself and stated that he owned no other house within the municipal limits of Tanda Urmar nor has he vacated any house therein since 1974. He was a Sergeant in Air Force and he retired in May, 1974. He has four children. His one daughter and one son are studying in the College and the other two in the school. The house in dispute is required for his personal requirement This house had fallen to his share in the family settlement. For the present he is living with his brother Virinder in the house which had fallen to latter's share. In his cross examination, he stated that his father owned four houses. One house has been retained by his father which is occupied by the latter and Virinder. Another house has fallen to the share of Virinder which is occupied by him (respondent). The house in dispute which is in occupation of the Petitioner fell to his share and the fourth one is in occupation of a tenant