RAMESH CHANDER SEHGAL Vs. RAJESH KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is instituted against the order dated 10.4.2015 rendered by the Rent Controller, Shimla in CMA No. 9-6 of 2015 in Rent Case No. 7/2 of 2011.

(2.) "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondents No.1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as the "landlords" for convenience sake) have instituted a petition under section 14 of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act for eviction of respondents No. 3 to 5. According to the averments made in the petition, shop bearing No.61 was more than 100 years old. The premises were rented out to the predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.3 to 5 in the year 1945. The premises under occupation of respondents No.3 to 5 were bona fide required by the landlords for setting up the officecum-business premises. Respondent No.1 is 65 years of age. He is graduate in Engineering. He retired as Chief Engineer from H.P.S.E.B. He has no suitable accommodation for running the proposed professional work in the premises occupied by the tenants. He has also decided to shift his daughter Mrs. Itee to Shimla so that she can take care of him and his wife in old age.

(3.) The petition was contested by the tenants. According to the averments made in the reply, respondent No.1 is having sufficient income and he had no intention to start any consultancy business. He owns a number of properties in Shimla. He has also independent house at Lower Jakhu, Shimla town. He has sufficient accommodation if he wants to start the consultancy business. Mrs. Itee is happily married and living with her in laws in their family.