HARVINDER KAUR SABHARWAL Vs. NAVNEET KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner impungs the order of the Rent Controller, Chandigarh dated 1st March, 1999 whereby he had allowed respondent Navneet Kaur to lead additional evidence. Before the Rent Controller, respondent Navneet Kaur, as landlady of the demised premises, sought eviction of the tenant on the ground of bona fide personal requirement.

(2.) A Full Bench of this Court in Banke Ram v. Smi. Sarash Devi, (1977) 79 P.L.R. 112 (F.B.), has identified two ingredients for establishing the claim of bona fide persona necessity. Firstly, the landlord must establish that he requires the premises for his personal use and occupation and secondly, the landlord must prove that he is not occupying any other property in the area nor has vacated any such building after the commencement of the Rerit Act. Both these ingredients must be Specifically pleaded in rent petition and must also be proved.

(3.) So far as the issue of pleadings is concerned, it is not disputed by the learned counsel for the parties that the aforesaid two ingredients were duly pleaded by the landlady Navneet Kaur (respondent herein) in the rent petition filed by her to seek eviction of petitioner from the demised premises.