HARSH MEHTA Vs. BALDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "tenant") has approached this Court by way of this Revision Petition, assailing judgment dtd. 20/4/2021, passed by Additional District Judge, Shimla exercising powers of Appellate Authority (IV) under Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987) in Rent Appeal No. 2-S/14 of 2020, titled as Harsh Mehta v. Baldeep Singh ., whereby, dismissing the appeal under Sec. 24 of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (for Short "the Act"), Appellate Authority has confirmed eviction order dtd. 12/12/2019, passed by learned Rent Controller, Court No. (II), Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Rent Petition No. 106/2 of 2016 titled as Baldeep Singh v. Harsh Mehta.

(2.) Respondent (hereinafter referred to as "landlord") approached the Rent Controller, Shimla for eviction of the tenant on the ground of bonafide requirement, claiming that accommodation occupied/available with the landlord was not sufficient to accommodate his daughter, studying in University of London intending to settle in Shimla to look after her aged parents i.e landlord and his wife.

(3.) Eviction Petition was opposed by the tenant on the ground that one set vacated by one Mrs. Judith Kroll, comprising of two big rooms, lobby and bath-cum-toilet, was available with landlord after eviction of tenant 2-3 years prior to filing of eviction petition and further that eviction petition has been filed by the landlord in order to harass the tenant and compelling her to enhance the rent exorbitantly.