Rajendra Nath Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the tenants against the order of the Appellate Authority, Amritsar, dated March 29, 1978 affirming the order of ejectment from a garage.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that Shrimati Sheela Wanti, Petitioner (Respondent in the revision petition) purchased the property in dispute from Dr. Sarudaman Chatrath, who had inherited it from his mother, Dr. Sawitri Devi. The Respondents took the garage, which is a part of the premises purchased from Dr. Sawitri Devi, at a rent of Rs. 50 per mensem and executed a rent note, dated April 12, 1968, in her favour. It is alleged by her that she required the premises for her own use and occupation. Consequently, she filed an application for ejectment under. Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It was contested by the Respondents who pleaded that Respondent No. 1 was a business concern and the garage was taken by it for business purposes. It was also pleaded that the Petitioner did not require the premises bona fide for her own use and occupation and that the accommodation with her was sufficient for her requirements. Some other pleas were taken by the Respondents but they are not relevant for the purposes of the determination of the revision petition. The learned Rent Controller held that the garage did not constitute non -residential premises and that the Petitioner required it bona fide for her own use and occupation. Consequently, he ordered ejectment of the Respondents.
(3.) THE Respondents went up in appeal before the Appellate Authority who affirmed the order of the Rent Controller and dismissed the same. They have come up in revision against that order to this Court.;