S.S.SODHI,J - (1.)THE impugned order of the appellate authority directing ejectment of the tenant on the ground that the landlord bonafide required the demised premises for his personal use and occupation, warrants no interference in revision.
(2.)THE petitioner Ram Singh was inducted as a tenant in the demised premises by Rameshwar Dass the owner thereof. Rameshwar Dass has three sons, the respondent Babu Ram being one of them. There was a family partition in November 1981 in pursuance of which the demised premises fell to the share of respondent Babu Ram on August 23, 1982 holding him to be the owner of this house.
The respondent Babu Ram, on his part, is living in house 169/12 as a tenant. This house was bought by his father Rameshwar Dass on August 4, 1980 vide sale deed Exhibit A/24.

(3.)AFTER the family partition and the demised premises coming to the share of respondent Babu Ram, Rameshwar Dass filed a petition for eviction against Babu Ram which was decided in favour of Rameshwar Dass on September 1, 1983.