- (1.) The landlord petitioners have filed this revision petition against the order of the Appellate Authority, Faridkot, dated 28th February, 1975, where by the order of the Rent Controller, directing the ejectment of the tenant, has been set aside.
(2.) Dhian Singh tenant is in possession of a room measuring 13 1/2' X 12 3/4' and a verandah in front of it, as shown in the plan Exhibit P. 1, situated in Jaito Mandi. The landlords-petitioners made an application under section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter called the 'Act') for his ejectment from the said premises, on the ground that same is required for their own use and occupation. In the written statement filed on behalf of the tenant, it was pleaded that the landlords are in possession of four chaubaras and room and they have also got vacated two rooms and again rented them out. Thus, ejectment application has been made to harass the tenant and to increase the rate of rent.
(3.) On the pleadings of the parties the learned Rent Controller framed the following issues : - 1. Whether the petitioners need the house for their bonafide necessity O. P. A. 2. Relief. The Rent Controller found that the accommodation with the petitioners was not sufficient and they needed the premises in dispute and consequently, directed the ejectment of the tenant. In appeal, the learned Appellate Authority has reverted this finding of the Rent Controller and came to the conclusion that the landlords do not bonafide require the premises in question and the application has been made for increasing the rate of rent. Consequently, the appeal was accepted and the ejectment application of the landlords was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved against this order, the landlords-petitioners have come up in revision to this Court.;