KULDEEP MARIA Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition under Section 24(5) of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 ("Rent Act" for short), is directed against the judgment of learned Appellate Authority, Shimla, dated August 23, 1997, affirming the judgment of learned Rent Controller (2), Shimla dated August 31, 1992 whereby the petition of the landlord for eviction of tenant-respondent on the grounds of bonafide requirement for personal use and occupation was dismissed.

(2.) PETITIONER , Dr. Kuldeep Maria, hereinafter referred to as "landlord", is the owner of the residential premises 20/1, Boileauganj, Talik Nagar, Shimla. One John Masih was in occupation of one room and covered verandah with latrine in the ground-floor, hereinafter referred to as the "disputed premises", on a monthly rental of rupees 15/-. Landlord filed a petition for eviction of John Masih, a statutory tenant, under Section 14 of the Rent Act on the ground of bonafide requirement by the petitioner for his own personal use and occupation. The petition was contested by the tenant, John Masih. The learned Rent Controller (2), Shimla vide his orders dated August 31, 1992, negatived the plea of the landlord that he requires the premises in dispute for his bonafide personal use and occupation. The plea of the tenant that he is contractual tenant and his tenancy has not been terminated, was rejected. Feeling dissatisfied, the landlord filed an appeal before the appellate authority, Shimla.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Deepak Gupta, learned counsel for the landlord-petitioner and Mr. Subhash Punshi, learned counsel for the tenant-respondent and also gone through the record.