R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.)THIS is a tenant's revision and has been directed against the judgment dated 9.2.1983 passed by the Court of appellate authority under Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, Karnal vide which he allowed the appeal of the landlord by setting aside the order dated 18.5.1982 passed by the learned Rent Controller who had dismissed the ejectment application of the landlord holding that it is not proved on the record that the landlord required the demised premises bonafide. However, the learned appellate authority granted one month's time to the petitioner-tenant to vacate the premises.
(2.)BEFORE I give the facts of this case I may make a mention here that the present revision was filed by Shri Hari Ram tenant against Shri Madho Ram, landlord. During the pendency of this revision Shri Madho Ram, landlord, has expired and his Legal Representatives have been brought on record.
The brief facts of the case are that Shri Madho Ram, landlord deceased file an ejectment application against Shri Hari Ram tenant. It was inter alia pleaded that Shri Hari Ram was inducted as a tenant in the portion of House No. 267, Sector 12, situated in Hanuman Gali, Karnal on as a monthly rent of Rs. 36/-. He is in occupation of two rooms and a verandah of the upper storey of the said house. The ejectment was sought on three grounds i.e. non-payment of rent with effect from 1.12.1977 to 30.4.1979; impairing the value and utility of the demised premises and the need of the landlords for shifting to the portion of the house in question along with the family of his son.

(3.)EJECTMENT application was contested by the tenant on the plea that the landlord had not accepted the rent in spite of being tendered in the Court. It was also stated that the landlord has got another house which has sufficient capacity of accommodation. Moreover, there was other tenants in the building in question against whom no petition for ejectment was filed. Reference was also made to another portion of the building which was vacated recently but had been let out to someone else. In these circumstances, the dismissal of the petition was sought for.