SURINDER MAHAJAN Vs. AJIT SANGHERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenants are in revision against the order of eviction passed against them under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (here -in -after referred to as the "Act") in respect of the demised premises i.e. half portion (measuring 12' x 80') of Plot No.448 -A, Industrial Area, Phase -II, Chandigarh.

(2.) THE respondent -landlady filed the petition for seeking eviction of the petitioners on the ground of misuse of the demised premises. It is alleged that she had received a notice dated 25.01.2006 from the concerned authorities about misuse of the demised premises which was brought to the notice of the petitioners and they assured that they would stop the misuse but despite request, misuser was not stopped which occasioned the threat of resumption of the entire premises.

(3.) BOTH the Courts below allowed the eviction petition on the ground that there was a misuser of the demised premises which was an industrial shed in which the petitioners were doing commercial activities. However, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that in the written agreement dated 16.12.2004 and 24.02.2006, they were allowed to use the demised premises for metal trade in accordance with the provisions of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulations) Act, 1952 (here -in -after referred to as the "Act") and the Rules framed thereunder and the other local bye -laws, as applicable to the building in question. It is submitted that since they were using the demised premises with the consent of the respondent -landlady, therefore, their eviction could not have been asked by the respondent -landlady on the ground of misuser.