BALDEV SINGH BAJWA Vs. BIMLA DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition under Section 13-A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, was filed by the landlord on 28.10.2003, when the landlord claimed that he was due for retirement on 31.03.2004. The contention of the landlord was that the property in the hands of the tenant at the second floor was necessary since he had not sufficient accommodation.

(2.) THE tenant resisted the claim of the petitioner denying the petitioner's status as a "specified landlord" and had also stated that there was no bona fides in the requirement of the landlord. The petition was dismissed by the Rent Controller by finding that the landlord had failed to establish that he was a "specified landlord" under the Rent Act. This deduction was made on the basis that the petitioner had not averred the respective shares which he, his wife and his brother were entitled to in the body of the petition. He also stated that the landlord had not averred anywhere that other two co-owners of the property had given the consent and that he was entitled to receive the rent in respect of demised premises in his capacity as a co-owner. While adverting to the issue of the bona fides, the Rent Controller found that it would be relevant only in a petition under Section 13(3) and it would not be relevant for consideration for a petition under Section 13-A.

(3.) THE question of bona fides of the landlord is definitely a point of issue for the Rent Controller that grants leave to defend and that passes an order ultimately for, eviction on the statement of the landlord, the Controller is bound to satisfy himself about the landlord's bona fides before ordering eviction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt with the requirement of proof of bona fides in a petition under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act in Baldev Singh Bajwa v. Monish Saini, 2005(4) RCR(Civil) 492 : 2005(2) RCR(Rent) 470 : (2005) 12 SCC 778, and the requirement of bona fides was seen through the provision of Section 18 (4) of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. The said provision is also to be applied to petitions under Section 13-A and the reasoning of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for proof of bona fides shall apply a fortiorari to a petition under Section 13-A also. The Hon'ble Supreme Court repelled a contention in the above case that the word 'required' used by the legislature in Section 13-B would mean bona fide or genuine requirement cannot be accepted and Section 13-B cannot be construed to mean that as and when the allegation is made by the landlord of his need, it is not taken as the gospel truth and the tenants' right to defend on that Court is completely extinguished and given a go-by.