LAWS(P&H)-2015-3-656

AVTAR SINGH Vs. GURJIT SINGH

Decided On March 26, 2015
AVTAR SINGH Appellant
V/S
GURJIT SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is preferred by the petitioner (tenant) against the judgment dated 04.05.2012 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Gurdaspur vide which the ejectment application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short "the Act) filed for ejectment of tenant from the demised premises was accepted and the judgment dated 31.01.2014 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Gurdaspur vide which the appeal preferred by the present petitioner (tenant) against the abovesaid judgment of the learned Rent Controller was dismissed.

(2.) THE case of the respondent herein (landlord) before the learned Rent Controller was that he is the owner -cum -landlord of the room in dispute (herein to be referred as "demised premises"). The present petitioner (tenant) is in occupation of the demised premises as a tenant at the rate of Rs. 200/ - per month, hence there exists relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties qua the demised premises. Previously mother of the tenant namely Piari was in occupation of the demised premises as a tenant who died about 14 years back. Now after her death, the present petitioner (tenant) is in occupation of the same as a tenant. The ejectment of the tenant from the demised premises was sought on the ground of nonpayment of rent since the last 11 years and that the demised premises are unfit and unsafe for human habitation being in a dilapidated condition. Hence was the instant petition.

(3.) ON notice respondent -tenant (petitioner herein) appeared taking preliminary objections that this petition is barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, under Section 11 CPC and concealment of the material facts from the Court on the part of the landlord (respondent herein). But anyhow it is admitted that he is a tenant in the demised premises under the respondent (landlord) and his mother Pritpal Kaur. Then it is denied that he is in arrears of rent since last 11 years as alleged in the petition. It is also denied that demised premises are unfit and unsafe for human habitation.