SANJEEV KUMAR Vs. SUMER CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT revision has been filed against the order of ejectment passed against the petitioner under Section 13(3)(a)(iv) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, which reads as under :-

(2.) THE learned Rent Controller and the learned Appellate Authority on the basis of evidence have recorded a finding of fact that the tenant-petitioner has purchased three shops in Sikka Market, Kaithal within the urban area of Municipal Committee, Kaithal wherein tenanted premises itself is situated and now enjoying possession of the same and running the business of spare parts which are sufficient for his business.

(3.) THE East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Amending) Act, 1956 was quashed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court holding the same to be ultra vires. It was in the said Act that in sub-clause (iv) the word 'any building' was substituted by the word 'any residential building'. In view of the quashing of the said Act the original Act came into force and accordingly, the landlord became entitled to eject the tenant from any building in case the tenant acquires accommodation of his own in the area concerned.