N.S. RAWAT Vs. H.S. BISHT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these revisions under Section 16(8) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (the Act, for short) are by two tenants against the same landlord and are directed against the order for the eviction passed by the Rent Controller, under Section 16(4) of the Act. The respective orders show that leave to defend sought for was refused and eviction ordered on the basis that the respective tenants shall be deemed to have admitted the averments contained in the applications for eviction.

(2.) THE applications before the Rent Controller related to two tenements on the ground floor of a building called the Bisht Bhawan situate in Sanjauli within the municipal limits of Shimla. It is a two storeyed building owned by the respondent-landlord. The ground floor of the building is in the occupation of the two tenants in two separate apartments. A two room set on the first floor is in the occupation of another tenant, by name, Prabhu Lal. One room on the first floor is in the occupation of yet another tenant Chet Ram and the landlord himself is in possession of a two room apartment on the first floor.

(3.) IN the present case the landlord has admitted that he is in possession of part of the same building, a two room apartment on the first floor where he has stored his household articles. According to him that two room apartment in his possession is not sufficient or suitable for the occupation of himself and his family consisting of himself, his wife, two sons and an invalid brother dependent on him. The tenants in their respective affidavits filed in support of their applications for leave to defend had inter alia raised the contention that the apartment in the same building in the possession of the landlords is sufficient for his occupation and is a suitable accommodation for himself and his family.