NANAK CHAND AND ORS. Vs. NANAK CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision has been filed under Section 15(6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner-landlords claimed that the demised shop was rented out to the respondent-tenant @ Rs. 650/- per month. The petitioners sought eviction inter alia on the grounds, (i) that the respondent had not paid or tendered the rent from 1.7.1993 to July, 1996; (ii) that the demised premises is required by the petitioners for their own need and bona fide necessity; and (iii) that respondent had changed the user of the demised premises for the purpose other than for which it was let out.

(2.) The instant revision is confined only to the later ground of eviction and according to the petitioner-landlords, the respondent was given the shop in question on rent for the purpose of cycle repair work but he has started manufacturing shoes and this has resulted in diminishing the value and utility of the demised shop. It may be stated that in the original application for eviction filed in the year 1996, the ground that respondent had changed the user of demised premises for the purpose other than it was let out was not pleaded.

(3.) The respondent in the written statement denied the grounds of eviction and stated that he deals in seasonal work, sometimes he runs the cycle repair shop and sometimes deals in shoes and another time in different articles whichever is more profitable. After filing of the written statement originally by the respondent, the petitioners amended the eviction application to incorporate the ground of change of user of the demised premises for the purpose other than for which it was let. The respondent also pleaded that the shop in question was taken on rent by him in the year 1974 on a monthly rent of Rs. 125/- which was increased to Rs. 175/- per month in the year 1985. Rejoinder was also filed by the petitioners.