KRISHAN LAL SOOD Vs. SHARDA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's revision petition against the order passed by the Appellate Authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act'), whereby the eviction of the petitioner has been ordered on the ground of personal necessary of the respondent-landlord.

(2.) AS per pleadings of the parties, the tenant is in occupation of the shop in dispute since 1990 with rent payable at the rate of Rs. 500/- P.M. The area under shop is 16' x 8'. The respondent-landlord filed a petition for eviction of the petitioner from the premises in dispute on various grounds including the ground of personal necessity. The other grounds such as non-payment of rent and house tax etc. were found against the landlord, however, claim on the basis of personal necessity was accepted by the Appellate Authority and accordingly eviction was ordered.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner-tenant submitted that the respondent- landlord having failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 13 of the Act while making assertions in the petition filed by her before the Rent Controller, her petition was required to be dismissed as such. He further submitted that even the personal necessity of the respondent-landlord was not proved as it was merely her bald statement that she needed the premises in dispute for use and occupation by her. As she wanted to open a tailoring shop there, when she does not have any experience or qualification in the line. Further it is submitted that the landlord is in occupation of other premises which can very well be used by her for carrying on business in case the need is for that. There is no question of eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the premises in dispute.