PANNU RAM Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution must be dismissed on the short ground that the petitioner has not been able to make out any case for retaining possession of the premises leased out to him.

(2.) In the year 1947 one Lal Singh, who was the owner of a certain house situate in Ludhiana, brought a suit for the ejectment of his tenant Pannu Ram on the ground that he required the premises for his own personal use. This suit was dismissed in due course and the order of the Rent Controller was confirmed by the District Judge in appeal. Shortly thereafter one Jaswant Singh, a son-in-law of Lal Singh, brought an application under section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he alleged that as the tenant was engaged in the manufacture of hosiery goods his presence on the premises constituted a nuisance to people in the neighbourhood. This petition too met with the same fate.

(3.) On the 15th March, 1955, Lal Singh partitioned the property belonging to him and this particular house fell to the share of his son Mohinder Singh. Mohinder Singh presented an application under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act and asked for the eviction of the tenant on the ground that he required the premises for his own use. The Rent Controller came to the conclusion that this transaction was merely a device to secure the eviction of the tenant and dismissed the application for ejectment. The District Judge, however, came to a contrary conclusion. He set aside the order of the Rent Controller and granted a decree for ejectment to Mohinder Singh. The tenant is dissatisfied with the order and has come to this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.