KAILASH KUMAR Vs. SURINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHAMA Devi, widow of late Nanak Chand, tenant is now represented by her legal representatives namely Kailash Kumar, son, Lata and Sharda, daughters, respectively.

(2.) LANDLADY Surinder Kaur filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restrict Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for eviction of the tenant on the ground of personal necessity. Another additional grounds taken were that the tenant is in the arrears of rent w.e.f. 1.12.1987 to 30.11.1995 and material alterations have been carried out in the demised premises and thus it has materially impaired the value and utility of the building. Personal necessity was made out that after the retirement of her husband, she wanted to settle at Gurdaspur and she was not occupying any other residential building in the urban area of Gurdaspur. A lot of efforts and energy was carried out by the parties to prove the ownership of the property.

(3.) MR . V.K. Jain, Senior Advocate, appearing for the respondent, on the instructions from Mr. S.K. Sandhir, Advocate, has stated that in eviction proceedings filed against two other tenants of the property, in a revision petition decided by this Court title of the landlady has been upheld. He has made reference to Smt. Sarda and Others v. Surinder Kaur (Civil Revision No. 1430 of 2008 (O&M) decided on 24.4.2008) and Ashok Kumar v. Surinder Kaur (Civil Revision No. 2994 of 2008 decided on 28.5.2008. The ground of non- payment of rent and having impaired material of the property have not been proved and pressed respectively and finding has been returned in favour of the tenant. Mr. Jain very candidly states that this Court need not devote attention to these issues.