KULWINDER KUMAR Vs. GURU RAVIDASS WELFARE SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is revision against order dated 06.03.2018 passed by learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar allowing ejectment petition filed by Guru Ravidass Welfare Society, Paragpur, Old Phagwara Road, Jalandhar (respondent) under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (later referred to as 'the Act') and ordering ejectment of the petitioner from two shops in portion of the property in which Gurudwara Sahib has been constructed.

(2.) Case of petitioner, in brief, is that the property comprised in khasra nos. 709, 711 and 716 were earlier under the ownership of Zila Parishad Mushtarka Malkan, which was left over land after constructing the old Phagwara Road. It was transferred to gram panchayat. A Gurudwara was constructed in khasra no. 709 and 710 (min) (0-13) in the year 1947. This Gurudwara was managed by the Society. On front side of Gurudwara four shops were constructed and on opposite side after crossing the road Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Bhawan was also constructed by the Society.

(3.) In reply, petitioner contested the claim of respondent inter alia pleading that petition is not maintainable; lacks required ingredients as per provisions of 'the Act'; respondent has not come to Court with clean hands and is guilty of suppressing the true and material facts from the Court and Major Dharam Chand and Mr. Sodhi Lal have no right or authority to file the present petition. On merit it was averred that a Janj Ghar/Community Centre was constructed on the land in question and the village people had formed Paragpur Social Welfare and Development Committee, Paragpur to manage affairs of Janj Ghar/Community Centre. Four shops at the spot are part and parcel of Janj Ghar/Community Centre, which is managed by Paragpur Social Welfare and Development Committee, Paragpur from whom the petitioner had taken two shops on rent. The respondent has got no concern with the shops in question and wants to dispossess the petitioner from the shops in an illegal and unlawful manner. Gurudwara Sahib is in fact opposite to the property in question, which is alleged by the respondent to be Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Bhawan. Regarding the report of Tehsildar, Jalandhar submitted after enquiry, the petitioner alleged that the same is not binding on him as he had no authority to give direction to him for retaining or vacating the shop or pay the rent to a particular person. It was denied that the shops were let out to the petitioner at the monthly rent of Rs.1000/- per month per shop. All the averments in the petition were contested, controverted and it was averred that the petitioner is not a tenant under the respondent, as such, the respondent cannot seek his ejectment as per provisions of Section 13 of the Act.