Smt. Rawel Kaur vs Mohinder Singh

J.V. Gupta, J.—This is landlady''s petition in whose favour eviction order was passed by the Rent Controller but the same was set aside, in appeal, by the Appellate Authority.

The Petitioner is the landlady of House No. 58/69, situated in N.I.T. Faridabad. There are four tenants in the said house. One room is on rent with the tenant Mohinder Singh According to the landlady it was rented to him at a monthly rent of Rs. 100/- in addition to electricity and water charges and house tax. The ejectment was sought on the ground that the tenant was a chronic defaulter in payment of rent, etc, and that the tenant had not paid arrears of rent from Ist June, 1975. However, the landlady claimed rent only from Ist June, 1978, for 36 months, @ Rs. 100/- per month and thirdly, she required the premises for her own use and occupation as the accommodation already with her was insufficient for her requirements. Allegations were also made that the tenant was guilty of such acts and conducts as were nuisance to the occupiers of the house and that the tenant had damaged the premises, and, thus, impaired the value and utility thereof. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenant, the said allegations were controverted. It was pleaded that the rent was Rs. 60/- p.m. and not Rs. 100/- as alleged. The learned Rent Controller found that the rent was Rs 60/- per month and not Rs 100/- as claimed by the landlady. Thus, the tender made on the first date of hearing was found to be valid. Other grounds were also negatived by the learned Rent Controller. However, on the ground of bona fide personal necessity he observed as under:

It is contended that the house in possession of the Petitioner is insufficient. In her statement as PW 2 she had stated that she wants to live separately from her son and daughter in law because she has no good relations with her daughter-in-law. It is a common knowledge that mother in law sometimes cannot get on with their daughters in-law. In such circumstances it is better if the mother-in-law resides separately from the daughter-in-law. I, therefore, find that the Petitioner has bona fide personal necessity to reside separately in the premises in dispute. She hat, therefore, bona fide necessity of the premises in dispute.

On this ground, the eviction order was passed. In appeal, the learned Appellate Authority reversed the said finding of the Rent Controller. It was observed that in the petition the landlady only stated that she required the premises in question as the present accommodation with her was insufficient for her use and occupation. She never pleaded that she wanted to shift from the premises as she had strained relations with her daughter-in-law. Thus, the finding of the Rent Controller was set aside and, consequently, the ejectment application was dismissed. Dissatisfied with the same, the landlady has filed this petition

The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that all the necessary ingredients were pleaded in the replication filed on her behalf and there is no evidence on record to show that the present accommodation in her occupation was sufficient and, therefore, the requirement was bona fide. According to the Learned Counsel, the finding of the Rent Controller in this behalf has been reversed in appeal arbitrarily.

After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties and going through the relevant evidence on record, 1 do not find that a case has been made out for eviction on the ground that the landlady bona fide required the premises for her own use and occupation Admittedly, there are four tenants in the house in dispute. The other tenants are paying Rs. 100/- as rent for one room whereas the present tenant Mohinder Singh is paying only Rs 60/- per month. Though in the ejectment application rent was claimed at the rate of Rs. 100/ per month by the landlord but this claim was negatived by both the authorities below. Apart front that there is nothing on the record to show that the present accommodation in her occupation is insufficient. The learned Rent Controller found that because of the strained relations between the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law he was entitled to evict her tenant which plea, admittedly, was not taken on behalf of the landlady in the ejectment application The plea taken in the ejectment application that the accommodation was insufficient was not proved on record. Moreover, it is also in evidence in the statement of the tenant Mohinder Singh that during the pendency of these proceedings one of the tenants vacated one of the rooms and in his place another tenant named Chand Ram was inducted. Thua, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case and the conduct of the lanldady she has failed to make out a case for bonafide requirement for her own use and occupation Consequently, the petition fails and is dismissed with costs.