DHARAM PAL Vs. MALKIAT SINGH GILL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 21.2.1987 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar whereby he declined leave to the tenant-petitioner to contest the eviction application filed by the landlord respondent under Section 13A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, as amended by Punjab Act No. 2 of 1985 (for short 'the Act'), and further allowing the said eviction application directed the petitioner to vacate the demised premises and hand over its vacant possession to the respondent.

(2.) THE respondent claiming himself to be a specified-landlord within the meaning of Section 2(hh) of the Act filed the eviction application on 3.1.1987. He stated therein that he is holding the post of Superintendent in the office of the District Education Officer and was thus holding an appointment in a public service in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab. The petitioner is a tenant under him on the first floor of the house in dispute in the portion shown in pink colour in the plan attached with the application. The respondent further stated that the accommodation in his possession in the said house on the ground floor shown in green colour in the said plan is insufficient for his use and for the use of his family members. He has two married sons and a daughter who are living in Canada and England and visit India from time to time and as such on their arrival at Jalandhar the respondent finds it difficult to provide accommodation to his sons, their wives and children. Even his other relations who live in India and abroad including his daughter and her husband visit him from time to time. All these relations are financially quite well to do. He has no accommodation to provide to them on their visits. The house in dispute owned by the respondent bears No. 155 and is situate in Ranjit Nagar, Jalandhar. He further averred that he is due to retire from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.1987. The application was accompanied by an affidavit as also a certificate from his employer.

(3.) THE respondent filed a reply to the application for leave to contest the eviction application moved by the respondent wherein he controverted the pleas raised by the petitioner.