GURJEET KAUR Vs. GURMEET KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed impugning the order dated 18.12.2017 of the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby, the eviction petition filed by the respondent-landlady has been allowed and the petitioner-tenant directed to vacate the demised premises i.e. H.No. 632, Sector 11-B, Chandigarh.

(2.) The respondent-landlady filed the petition under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Restriction Act, 1949 as applicable to Chandigarh for eviction of the tenant on the grounds of (i) non payment of rent and (ii) bonafide personal necessity. The ground of non-payment of rent, however, was not pressed.

(3.) It was claimed by her in the eviction petition that she is a nonresident Indian and was staying at Auckland (New Zealand). Her husband Gurmohan Singh Saini was the owner and landlord of H.No.632, Sector 11-B, Chandigarh. The ground floor except garage had been rented out to the tenant through registered lease dated 16.01.2001. Her husband expired on 24.2013 leaving behind his widow Gurmit Kaur-landlady and two sons Harinder Singh Saini and Bupinder Singh Saini. During his life time, her husband had executed a registered will dated 16.09.2005 in her favour. As per the said Will she was the owner of the said property. She claimed that she had decided to return back to India to spent the rest of her life in her hometown at Chandigarh. She was suffering from various diseases related to old age that is back ache, cervical, knee problem and had been advised not to climb up the stairs. Hence, the accommodation at the first floor was not suitable and she required the entire ground floor for her bonafide personal need. She also pleaded that she was not in occupation of any other residential premises in the urban area of Chandigarh, Panchkula and Mohali nor had she vacated any such premises without sufficient cause since the enforcement of the Act.