S.S.SUDHALKAR,J - (1.) PREDECESSOR of petitioner-landlord had filed an eviction petition in the Court of learned Rent Controller, Patiala on the ground that the respondent-firm was in arrears of rent and it has ceased to occupy the rented shop for a continuous period of four months without reasonable cause. The eviction petition was dismissed. The appeal filed over the same was also dismissed and hence this revision petition has been filed by the landlord.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None has appeared for the respondent. Counsel for the petitioner has argued on the point of non-user for four months. According to the case of the landlord, the respondent is a commission agent and the shop rented out to him is situated at Anaj Mandi, Patiala. According to the petitioner, respondent firm had ceased to occupy the shop for a continuous period of four months without any reasonable cause and it has shifted their business to a new shop in new Anaj Mandi, Sirhind Road, Patiala and had kept the rented premises in a locked condition. To this allegation, the reply of the respondent is that the allegations are wrong and the shop in question was not kept locked. It is contended that the auction of the seasonal crops had been stopped by the notification of the Government and the same now takes place in New Mandi, Sirhind Road as well as in other purchase centre. The Head Office of the respondent firm remains in the rented shop at Anaj Mandi, Nabha Gate, Patiala and the firm has been carrying on its business of accounts of purchase and sale, and dealing with its customers etc., at that very shop as usual as before. It is further contended in the reply that the respondent-firm has been using the premises in dispute for storing its goods etc.
(3.) BOTH the sides have examined the witnesses in this case. AW1 is the husband of the deceased petitioner Parkash Kaur. AW2 Mastan Singh has been examined to show that the shop had remained closed. AW3 Sardari Lal has been examined to show that they had seen the shop remaining closed. AW4 is the Clerk of the Market Committee, Patiala and he had produced the licence of the respondent Ex.AW4/1 which showed that the shop is situated in new Anaj Mandi, AW5 is the electricity Meter Reader who has deposed that according to meter reading books and the ledger, the reading was taken on 30.9.1978 which was nil. It was taken earlier in July, 1970 and the reading taken on 30.9.1978 pertains to the period July, 1978 to 30.9.1978. He has further deposed that the meter reading book also shows that the shop was lying closed from November, 1978 onwards and the shop was closed when Meter Reader went to shop for meter reading from November, 1978 to April, 1980. He has further deposed that before July, 1978 meter reading was being done and electricity was consumed.;