JINDAL AUTO DISTRIBUTORS Vs. UMESH UPPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent-Umesh Uppal (landlord) filed petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for eviction of petitioners from ground floor of SCF No. 609, Motor Market, Manimajra, U.T. Chandigarh, on the ground of his personal bona fide necessity to start his business of paints and auto parts. Learned Rent Controller upheld the plea of bona fide need of respondent-landlord and also held that the petition filed by a co-owner seeking ejectment of tenant is maintainable. However, ejectment petition was dismissed with the observation that the respondent-landlord has not approached the Court with clean hands as he has not disclosed in his petition that first and second floor of the premises had been let out to a tenant and the same were not suitable for his business.

(2.) Against findings of learned Rent Controller that need of respondent-landlord is bona fide and petition is maintainable, petitioners-tenants did not file any appeal or cross-objections, while respondent-landlord filed appeal before the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, which reversed the finding of learned Rent Controller regarding concealment of fact by landlord-respondent with the observations as follows:-

(3.) Not satisfied, petitioners-tenants have filed this revision petition. As learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the judgments of Courts below on legal grounds only, detailed facts of the case are being skipped for the sake of brevity.