LAWS(P&H)-2019-1-94

HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. SOHAN SINGH

Decided On January 07, 2019
HARBHAJAN SINGH Appellant
V/S
SOHAN SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the landlord challenging judgment dtd. 11/4/2001 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana as well as judgment dtd. 1/3/2004 passed by the learned Appellate authority, Ludhiana.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that petition under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 was filed by the petitioner (through his legal representatives) seeking eviction of the respondent - tenant on the ground of arrears of rent as well as material impairment of the value and utility of the plot in question. It was pleaded that Harbhajan Singh was the owner of the plot measuring 230 square yards as described in the petition. It was given to the respondent on licence/rent for running a business of selling fodder on the payment of Rs.120.00 per month. Rent was subsequently enhanced to Rs.150.00 per month. Licence deed to this effect was executed on 12/5/1976 (Ex. AW2/A). It was specifically mentioned in the said deed that the vacant plot shall be used exclusively for the purpose of selling fodder. Respondent undertook not to raise any construction thereon without written consent of the landlord. However, the respondent it was pleaded raised construction thereon and installed a weigh bridge, thus, impairing the value and utility of the plot. A registered legal notice dtd. 21/1/1989 was sent to him. Reply dtd. 8/2/1989 was submitted by the respondent. The respondent was also stated to be in the arrears of rent. Hence, the petition.

(3.) Petition was resisted by the respondent - tenant while refuting the averments in the petition. It was asserted that the construction over the plot was raised with oral consent of the petitioner who had pleaded paucity of funds with him. It was agreed that the room constructed thereon would vest with the landlord. It was denied that value and utility was impaired in any manner. In fact, the value and utility of the plot was enhanced by the said construction. Dismissal of the petition was prayed for. Replication was filed.