KIRPAL SINGH Vs. BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a Non-Resident Indian and a landlord within the ambit of Section 2(dd) of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, filed a plea for the ejectment of the respondent-Bank from the premises under reference, of which he was a co-owner. Though findings on all other points upheld the plea raised by the petitioner, he was non-suited on account of his inability to place on record the title deed vide which he had acquired title, as a co-owner of the premises under reference.

(2.) ALONG with the present revision petition directed against the order dated 8.9.2005, the petitioner also filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure craving the leave of this Court to adduce additional evidence and to thereby prove on record registered sale-deed, Annexure P3.

(3.) IN the light of foregoing discussion, the petition shall stand allowed. The matter is remitted to the learned Rent Controller for a decision afresh after allowing the petitioner-landlord to prove the registered sale-deed, Annexure P3. Of course, the respondent-tenant shall also have an opportunity to rebut the evidence aforementioned.