- (1.) THE petitioner impugns the order dated 12.3.2014 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Chandigarh by which the plea of the landlord was accepted to oust the petitioner from the tenanted premises.
(2.) THE respondent/landlord initiated proceedings to seek eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises for setting up a real estate business for his son and himself. It was pleaded that the petitioner along with his son were already in this business and they were residing in rented premises and thus, required the demised premises. The plea of material alterations was also taken to contend that the tenant had made one pucca room and verandah without the consent of the landlord. It was also pleaded that the respondent is a continuous nuisance and various criminal cases have been filed against him. It was next contended that the tenant owns various properties in Chandigarh including House No.781/1 near Manimajra and he has sold another plot in Mauli Jagran. The present petitioner who is the tenant, disputed all the grounds and the parties went to trial on the following issues : - (1) Whether the petitioners require the premises for their personal use and occupation ? OPP. (2) Whether the respondents have made material alterations in the tenanted premises without the consent of the petitioner, if so, its effect ? OPR. (3) Whether the petition is barred under Section 10 CPC ? OPR. (4) Whether the petitioners have not approached the Court with clean hands ? OPR. (5) Whether the petitioners are estopped from filing the present petition for their own act and conduct ? OPR. (6) Relief.
(3.) THE learned Rent Controller dismissed the petition which was accepted by the learned Appellate Authority. During the course of proceedings, the landlord Shashi Bhushan died and the petition was prosecuted by another petitioner Sandep Kumar and the remaining LRs i.e. the wife, son and daughter.;