- (1.) The following questions have been referred to Larger Bench vide order dated 29.9.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge: 1 Whether NRI/landlord who is a co-owner with the other landlords, who do not have the same status, as that of NRI can maintain a petition for eviction of the tenant from the property jointly owned by all of them? 2 Whether the premises from which eviction is sought under Section 13-B of the Act is to be let out by NRI/landlord or his duly authorized person acting on his behalf, or it can also include the letting by some other co-owner or predecessor-in-interest in their own right and not under the authority of NRI/landlord?
(2.) The said questions of law relates to the interpretation of the provisions of Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Punjab Act'), as inserted by the Punjab Act No. 9 of 2001.
(3.) The facts relevant are taken from Civil Revision No. 4025 of 2005. The Petitioner-Bachan Kaur pleaded that the Respondent was inducted as tenant in the building by her late husband Kabal Singh vide rent note dated 21.4.1980 as a co-owner with her and that the Petitioners intend to come back to India permanently and that they have completed five years ownership over the property in question. It may be noticed that Kabal Singh, husband of Petitioner-Bachan Kaur, died and his estate is inherited by his two sons namely, Gurmail Singh and Rajinder Singh. The trial Court dismissed the petition, inter-alia, for the reasons that the Petitioners are not proved to be Non Resident Indians (for short NRI's) and that the Petitioners have not returned to India, in the last more than six years before 2003 when statement of Tarsem Singh, one of the Petitioners was recorded.;