BODH RAJ Vs. BALBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of Civil Revision Nos. 1864 and 1920 of 1978, as the question involved is common in both the cases and the parties are also the same.

(2.) BALBIR Singh and Mohan Singh, landlords, sought ejectment of their tenant Bodh Raj from the premises in dispute consisting of six rooms, out of which two rooms are in occupation of the landlord. Since there were two separate tenancies hence two separate applications were filed against Bodh Raj. The ejectment applications were filed in August 1973, primarily on the ground that the landlord bonafide required the building for their own use and occupation. It was pleaded that the landlords at present are living with their father Swarn Singh in a house consisting of four rooms, a kitchen and a store. It was further pleaded that one room of that house was in a dilapidated condition. Their father had to school going sons and one school going daughter and there was not sufficient accommodation for the entire family, as a result of which one of his son was compelled to reside separately by hiring a house in Modal Town. It was further pleaded that they purchased the house in dispute with the sole object, for their personal residence. Balbir Singh was married about 1-1/2 months prior to the filing of the application. This application was contested on behalf of the tenant.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the accommodation already with the landlords in the house of their father was sufficient. Apart from that, there were other accommodations also in their occupation in the form of two Chaubaras. Thus argued, the learned counsel, the view taken by the authorities below was wrong and illegal. The landlords have failed to make out a case for bonafide requirement.