SURINDER KUMAR Vs. RATTAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE tenant, who was directed to be evicted on proof of the landlord of his personal requirement in respect of a Shop-cum-Flat No. 84, Sector 26, Grain Market, Chandigarh, is the revision petitioner before this Court. II. Additional reasons as ground for personal requirement in appeal :

(2.) BEFORE the Rent Controller, the landlord had complained that the tenant was guilty of unauthorized change of user of the building and that the tenant was guilty of non-payment of rent. He also had referred to the requirement of his son Sh. Rajesh Bindal for setting up his office. The petition had been dismissed and in appeal, the landlord sought to amend the petition by including additional reasons for the relief of the requirement of the premises for the personal need of the landlord. This amendment was introduced along with the appeal, stating that the petition had been prepared and sought to be filed before the Rent Controller but it was omitted to be done by oversight and therefore, the application for amendment should be considered. The tenant filed his counter but the Appellate Authority passed a detailed order permitting the amendment to be made by its order dated 05.12.1997. In his order, the Appellate Court had observed as follows :-

(3.) LEARNED counsel, Sh. Amarjit Markan challenges the order passed by the Appellate Authority on the following grounds :-