SHIVSHANKAR LAL AND ANR. Vs. SURENDER NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of the Rent Controller, Charkhi Dadri dated 29th March, 1989 whereby an eviction order has been passed under Section 13 -A of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as amended.

(2.) THE premises in dispute were rented out, - -vide rent note dated 13th March, 1954 on a monthly rent of Rs. 900. Application for eviction was filed on 13th November, 1987 purporting to be under Section 13 -A of the Act. The premises in dispute were alleged to be residential building. Ejectment was sought under Section 13 -A, the landlord being a member of the Armed Forces and having retired on 30th November, 1986 as Lt. Col. The other grounds taken were non -payment of arrears of rent and in the alternative even if the premises in dispute are held to be a non -residential building, the landlord having retired from the Armed Forces required the same for his personal use and therefore, was entitled to eject the tenant. Summons were issued to the tenant for 27th January. 1988. On that day, the tenant appeared and on the assessment of the arrears of rent and the costs etc. he tendered the arrears of rent, but the landlord refused to accept the same. The case was then adjourned from time to time. It was on 3rd March, 1989 that the landlord moved an application that eviction order be passed against the tenant under Section 13 -A as the tenant failed to file affidavit as required under Section 13 -A(4) of the Act stating the grounds on which he seeks to contest the application for eviction nor obtained any leave from the Rent Controller to contest the same. Notice of this application was given to the tenant. Though the reply to the same was filed but the Rent Controller passed the eviction order on 29th March, 1989 on the short ground that the Respondents were required to contest the application after filing the affidavits and obtaining the leave of this Court but uptill now neither affidavit has been filed by the tenant nor leave of this Court was obtained and therefore, the Rent Controller had no option but to pass the eviction order.

(3.) ON the other hand, Id. counsel for the landlord /Respondent submitted that the eviction application was filed under Section 13 -A of the Act though certain other grounds were also taken, therein. The eviction order could be passed under Section 13 -A and that being so since the tenant failed to seek permission to contest, eviction order has been rightly passed by the Rent Controller.