NEENA THAPPAR Vs. AVTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the learned Appellate Authority, who on appeal affirmed the order of the learned Rent Controller dismissing the application filed under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short, referred to as 'the Act') against the respondent.

(2.) THE landlady came to the court with the allegations that the demised premises was required by her residence and for her family members. The family comprises of her, there children and her husband. Her husband was in service of Punjab State Electricity Board and has since retired on post of Superintendent Grade-I. Her husband owned a house situate in Preet Nagar, Patiala, but the accommodation in the kothi situate in Preet Nagar, Patiala, was insufficient to meet the family requirement.

(3.) THE learned Appellate Authority negatived the claim of the petitioner on the ground that from the conduct of the petitioner he is unable to believe that the accommodation available to the landlady for her occupation in the house situate in Preet Nagar, Patiala, is sufficient. However the learned Appellate Authority affirmed that the ejectment application was not bad for partial eviction. It was further found that the tenant has not impaired the value and utility of the demised premises by effecting any alteration or addition.