MOHD. SHARIF Vs. SHAISTA PARVEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition directs challenge against order dtd. 28/1/2016 passed by the Appellate Authority, Sangrur whereby appeal preferred by the respondent against order dtd. 13/9/2011 passed by the Rent Controller dismissing the application for eviction, was allowed and the petitioner has been directed to vacate the demised premises within three months from passing of the order.

(2.) The petitioner filed reply and contested claim of the respondent that she is the owner/landlady of the shop in question. It is averred that originally property was taken on monthly rent of Rs.300.00 in 1983 and the same was revised @ Rs.400.00 per month vide rent note dtd. 26/3/1991. It was further denied that Saeed Ahmed Khan gifted the property to respondent on 2/10/2006 or memorandum of gift was prepared on 5/6/2007. No relationship of landlord and tenant came into existence as gift deed dtd. 5/6/2007 is sham, illegal, unregistered, inadmissible and fraudulent document which does not confer any right in favour of the respondent. Saeed Ahmed Khan is still owner of the property. He is running a PCO and also working as contractor in Panchayati Raj, PW Division. He has other shops and common properties in his name. Rent has been tendered in Court proceedings to avoid complications though respondent is not entitle to rent as she is not the landlady. All other material averments of the application were denied with a prayer for dismissal thereof.

(3.) The Rent Controller, in view of facts elicited in cross examination of the respondent, when examined in the light of essentials of a valid gift under Muslim Law recorded its finding that the respondent did not become owner/landlady of the shop in question and as such, there exists no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties in order to entitle the respondent to seek eviction of the petitioner on any of the grounds available under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short 'the Act').