VINOD KUMAR Vs. VIJAY LAXMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent had filed the petition under Section 13 of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 seeking ejectment of the petitioner from the premises in question. Learned Rent Controller vide order dated 24.3.2014 allowed the ejectment petition. Aggrieved against the said order, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide judgment dated 3.4.2015. Hence, the present petition by the petitioner-tenant.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent had failed to establish that she required the premises in question for her own personal use and occupation. In fact, the relatives of the respondent were residing in Chandigarh. Respondent had never lived in Ambala City. The ejectment had been merely filed to eject the petitioner from the premises in question, The Appellate Authority had dismissed the ejectment petition filed by the respondent qua the other tenant who was in possession of part of the premises in question. In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance on 'Jagdish Rai Chandna versus Swaran Dass, 2000 1 RCR(Rent) 373', wherein it was held as under:-

(3.) Learned counsel has next placed reliance on Kasturi Lal Handa and another versus Bhajan Singh, 1991 2 RCR(Rent) 35', wherein it was held as under:-