The High Court dismissed a revision petition where tenants challenged eviction orders based on personal necessity. The court held that the need for caretakers persisted for the elderly landlord's surviving wife, rendering the challenge devoid of merits.
Revival petition against eviction order dismissed; eviction stands affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CR 1461/2013(O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR 1461/2013(O&M) Date of decision:19/08/2013
Bhagwanti Devi and others
.............Petitioners
v.
Sarla Devi and others
.............Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:Mr.Arihant Jain,Advocate for the petitioners/tenants.
Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)
Tenants/petitioners are in revision against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Authorities below whereby in the eviction petition filed by the respondents/landlords, the learned Rent Controller, Patiala vide order dated 1.3.2011 has ordered their eviction on the ground of personal necessity and demised premises having become unfit and unsafe for human habitation; and the said findings affirmed in appeal by the learned Appellate Authority, Patiala vide judgement and decree dated 8.11.2012.
At the time of hearing, it is argued that the personal necessity of the landlord-Devi Dass Mehta and his wife was for accommodating their daughter and her family to live in the sameJoshi Rajinder Prashad 2013.08.19 17:19 I attest to the accuracy of this Order. High Court, Chandigarh.
2
CR 1461/2013(O&M)
premises for looking after them. It is stated that the landlord-Devi Dass Mehta has since died as also the daughter whose family was projected to come and live with the aged parents to look after them. It is thus submitted that the subsequent event of death of the landlord and the daughter negates the personal necessity of the landlords.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the considered view that the present revision petition is devoid of any merits.
It has come on record that the landlord has stated that he and his wife are aged persons and living alone in the adjoining part of the demised premises. It was stated that they require for their daughter and her family to come and reside with them in the demised premises in order to take care of aged parents. Although the landlord has died the need of the aged wife still remains. Still further, it is not in dispute that the son-in-law Yash Pal Bedi appeared in the witness box as AW1 and showed his willingness alongwith his wife and other family members to shift and take care of the aged parents. Therefore, even if the daughter has died, it nowhere dents the case of the landlords, in view of the evidence on record regarding the established necessity.
Dismissed.
19.08.2013. joshi
(Jaswant Singh) Judge
Joshi Rajinder Prashad 2013.08.19 17:19 I attest to the accuracy of this Order. High Court, Chandigarh.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the ground of personal necessity for eviction remains valid despite subsequent deaths of the proposed family members.
Whether the revision against the eviction order has any merit.
Bhagwanti Devi and others
Sarla Devi and others
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
