S K RAMAN CHOPRA Vs. RAJINDER SINGH THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether a specified landlord is entitled to seek eviction of his tenant from "non-residential building" by invoking Sec. 15 (1) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' in short) is one of the moot questions, that arises for consideration in this appeal.

(2.) In view of the nature of the order I propose to pass, it is not necessary to delve into the facts of the case, in detail.

(3.) Suffice it to state that the petitioner, who admittedly is a tenant, in a non-residential building belonging to the respondent/landlord filed an application under Sec. 16(4) of the Act for grant of leave to contest the petition filed by the respondent under Sec. 15 (1) of the Act. It was averred that the petitioner had received summons in the rent petition and intended to contest the same on the following grounds - Firstly, the petition filed by the respondent/landlord was not maintainable under the provisions of Sec. 15(1) of the Act since the premises were non-residential and commercial one and as such, the provisions of Sec. 15(1) of the Act were not applicable. Secondly, it was averred that the respondent is owner in possession of residential house nearby by the shop in question and the respondent is having sufficient accommodation having three bed rooms set on ground floor and having two rooms set on the first floor of said building. It was further averred that besides this, the respondent is having 787 sq. mts. of land out of which 448 sq. mts. is vacant and is situated adjacent to the shop in question. It was thus averred that since the respondent is having sufficient space and accommodation for carrying out any type of business, hence petition filed by him is not maintainable.