AMRO DEVI Vs. GURMAIL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this order it is proposed to dispose of Civil Revision Nos. 395 of 2000 titled Amro Devi and others v. Gurmail Chand and Civil Revision Nos. 396 of 2000 titled Mast Ram v. Gurmail Chand.

(2.) TWO ejectment petitions were filed by the respondent under Section 15 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), against the petitioners in these two revision petitions. He prayed for the eviction of the tenants from the premises in their possession as a specified landlord as defined under Section 2(i) of the Act.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Shri B.K. Sood, learned counsel appearing for petitioner-tenant raised a number of pleas with a view to set aside the impugned order of ejectment passed in favour of the respondent under Section 15 of the Act treating him as a specified landlord. Amongst others a plea based on Section 15(2) Explanation was also raised. In order to properly appreciate this submission Section 15(2) Explanation from the Act needs to be extracted. Explanation : For the purpose of this section, the expression retirement includes the voluntary retirement but does not include resignation, discharge for dismissal from service.