DEEPAK MAINI Vs. AMRIK SINGH KHATKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner -tenant is aggrieved at the order dated 20.8.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Phagwara, whereby in an eviction petition under Section 13 -B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), leave to contest has been declined to him and consequential eviction order has been passed.

(2.) THE respondent -NEI landlord filed the eviction petition under Section 13 -B of the Act, seeking the petitioner's eviction from the demised premises situated at Pharwara, District Kapurthala. The respondent, inter alia, alleged that the demised premises was earlier owned by his father Charan Singh who passed away on 2.5.1973. The mother of the respondent, namely, Gurmej Kaur, also died on 27.12.1997. The estate of the deceased parents of the respondent including the demised premises, has been inherited by the respondent -Amrik Singh alongwith his two brothers namely, Surinder Pal and Kuldeep Singh. The respondent further averred that he alongwith his brother Surinder Pal is residing in United Kingdom for more than 20 years and are Non -Resident - Indians. He further averred that the demised premises is required by him as he wants to return India and start his own business. The respondents specifically averred that he is owner of the demised premises for the last more than 5 years before filing of the eviction petition and in support thereof, relied upon the revenue record comprising jamabandi for the year 2000 -2001.

(3.) WHILE explaining the legislative intent and import behind provisions like Section 2(dd), 13 -B and 18 -A of the Act inserted/amended vide Act No. 9 of 2001, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Baldev Singh Bajwa v. Monish Saini, : 2005(4) R.C.R.(Civil) 492 : 2005(2) R.C.R.(Rent) 470: (2005) 12 SCC 778, has ruled that: -