Revision against eviction order for personal necessity was dismissed. The court held the landlady's established need for her son's occupation sufficed to sustain the order, rejecting arguments regarding lack of training certification.
Revision petition dismissed; eviction order confirmed.
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 No.1902 of 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.1902 of 2013(O&M) Date of decision: 20.03.2013
Gautam Sharma S/o Sh. Ram Lok Sharma
.....Petitioner
VERSUS
Smt. Prem W/o Sh. Vijay Kumar
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
Present: Mr. Kamaljeet Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajaivir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
K. KANNAN, J.(ORAL)
the ground of non-payment of rent and for personal necessity for establishing a Hair Cutting Saloon for her son. The landlady gave evidence before the Rent Controller to the effect that her son had studied up to 8th standard and he had to discontinue, when her husband died. He was 25 years of age and that he had taken training under one Sandeep who had a Hair Cutting Saloon. The cross-examination to the witness was that there was no certificate issued by Sandeep to her son for having undertaken training. The respondent himself had given evidence that the petitioner's son had not taken any training in hair
CR No.1902 of 2013 2
cutting technique and that he was working as an employe in the cloth shop. The Court, however, found that the landlady's need was established. It also found that the tenant had not paid the rent. This order was confirmed in appeal.
CR No.1902 of 2013
3
required to be interfered before this Court.
dismissed.
3. Time for eviction three months.
20.03.2013 Diwaker Gulati
[ K. KANNAN ] JUDGE
Gautam Sharma
Smt. Prem
K. KANNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
