JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Punjab High Court (Circuit Bench at New Delhi) dismissing a petition for revision directed against the concurrent judgments of the courts below dismissing the action for eviction filed by the appellant against the respondents from a premises on Ajmal Khan Road Karol Bagh, New Delhi.
(2.) The facts may be succinctly stated. By means of a rent deed dated February 13, 1950 the appellant, who is the owner of the suit premises inducted as a tenant Labha Mal Arora, now deceased who was a practising Advocate. Clauses (2) and (6) of the rent deed were in the following terms:
"2. That the tenant agrees to use the property for his residence.
6. That the tenant shall not assign or sublet the above said property or any part thereof without the written consent of the landlord or utilise the property for any purpose other than that mentioned above."
(3.) On the same date a letter Ex. D-2 was written by the appellant to the late Labha Mal Arora saying:
"As per our oral talk regarding your tenancy for my house No. 6/64, I have no objection your having your professional office along with residence there provided it is not inconsistent with the "provisions of Delhi Improvement Trust Act."
It appears and it has been so found, that Labha Mal Arora who had his office at a different place shifted the same to the suit premises where he was residing with his family. He died in the year 1952. Till 1952 the premises were being used only for residence by his sons and widow. In August l957 Chaman Lal respondent No. 1, who qualified himself as a legal practitioner, started having an office in the premises. It would appear that the other son respondent No. 3 also started practising as a lawyer in the same premises some time later. On 21st November, 1957 the appellant served a notice on the sons and widow of the deceased Labha Mal Arora that it had been learnt that they had constructed a double-storeyed building Naiwala Karol Bagh and that since the suit premises were required bona fide for the personal residence of the appellant they should shift to their house and vacate the rented premises. This was followed by a second notice to the same effect. ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.