VIDYA RANI Vs. BHAG SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the tenant who has been directed to be evicted in an action taken under Section 13-B of the East Urban Rent Restriction Act. The landlord was an owner of 14 shops of which three shops were in the possession of the tenants. In respect of 11 shops, the landlord's contention was that the respective tenants had offered to surrender possession of the property by 2005 and only the tenant was not prepared to vacate and, therefore, he was forced to file a petition for ejectment. The petitioner would declare his need as a person returning from England to India to carry on his business of building materials such as marble, cement, sand, scaffolding, chips etc. The petitioner would explain that he was dealing with building contractors and he was working as electrician with installation of electrical fitting in England and he was well conversant with the nature of said business.

(2.) At the time of trial, it was elicited in the cross-examination that he had during the proceedings obtained vacant possession of the 11 shops in the hands of the other tenants, but there they all were lying closed. He also disclosed that the electrical meters installed in the shops had been disconnected on his own request. The evidence was tendered by him in the year 2012.

(3.) The conduct of the landlord in abandoning the premises recovered from other tenants cannot be taken as irrelevant. It makes evident the lack of bonafide of his need in respect of all the tenements that had been vacated by the other tenants. He had done nothing to start the business.