SHAM SUNDER Vs. SHORI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision is directed against the order of the authorities below whereby tenant has been ordered to be ejected on the ground of personal necessity. It has been concurrently found by the authorities below that the landlord is staying in a rented premises consisting of two rooms and the accommodation in possession of the landlord is insufficient for his and his family's requirement. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the civil revision, wife of the landlord has purchased the premises which were in occupation of the landlord and because of this subsequent event, the necessity of the landlord is no more subsisting. In support of this, he has relied upon (i) A.I.R. 1975 S.C. 1409,1 (ii) 1981(2) R.C.R. 336,2 and (iii) 1995(1) R.C.R. 519,3.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. I am of the view that there is no merit in this civil revision. Both the Courts below have found that accommodation in possession of the landlord is insufficient for his requirement. Even if the property has been purchased by the wife of the landlord, that would not make the accommodation in his possession sufficient as the finding is that the accommodation in his possession is not sufficient for his requirement. Accordingly, the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel have no application to the facts of the present case. This civil revision is dismissed. However, at the request made on behalf of the petitioner-tenant, three months' time is allowed to vacate the premises provided he furnishes an undertaking within 15 days with the Rent Controller that he shall hand over vacant possession of the premises, on the expiry of the said period, to the landlord and also deposits the entire arrears of rent including that of three months.