GOMTI DEVI Vs. SATYA PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgement dated 6.2.1986 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, whereby it allowed the application filed by landlords, respondents Nos. 1 and 2, under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Restriction Act, 1949 as applicable to the Union Territory Chandigarh (for short 'the Act') and ordered the ejectment of the tenant-petitioners from demised premises.

(2.) Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 took on rent shop-cum-flat No. 38, Sector 18-D, Chandigarh from the landlord in the year 1971.

(3.) The petitioners in their written statement did not deny the fact of having taken the premises on rent from respondent Nos. 1 and 2. It was, however, pleaded that no ground of ejectment was available to the said respondents; the rent had already been paid to them but on the first date of hearing to avoid the ejectment, the rent amounting to Rs. 8700/- from 1.4.1976 to 31.1.1982 along with interest and costs was tendered, which was duly received by respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The plea of bonafide personal requirement of the premises by the said respondents was also contested. It was alleged that the son of respondent No. 1 who has been married, is living at Mohali and is carrying on business independently. It was further maintained that the ejectment on the ground of personal necessity could not be maintained as the premises from part of a shop-cum-flat which is non-residential building. The ejectment application of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller vide hip order dated 10.2.1984. The appeal filed by these respondents was allowed by the learned Appellate Authority vide judgment under appeal and that is how the tenant-petitioner have filed the present revision petition in this Court.