Mahesh Grover, J. - (1.) THIS order will dispose of all the aforesaid eight revision petitions directed by the petitioners who are tenants in the premises which were sought to be vacated by the respondent -landlord Bank by filing petitions under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 on the following grounds: i) Arrears of rent; and ii) Personal need of the landlord. It was averred in the rent petitions that the premises are required for the staff/employees and for better transaction of business due to increase in the number of employees and business. It was also pleaded that expansion is required to post new officers etc.
(2.) IN so far as the ground for non -payment of rent was concerned, it was rendered redundant on account of its satisfaction leaving the learned Rent Controller to examine the issue of personal necessity raised by the landlord -respondent. The learned Rent Controller concluded the need to be unfounded and dismissed the petitions, but in appeal the Appellate Authority reversed the findings and ordered the eviction of the petitioners which is now a cause of grievance to them.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends that the Appellate Authority has gone wrong in holding the need to be genuine whereas there was evidence to suggest that the actual staff strength of the bank has been reduced. He thus contends that the findings of the Appellate Authority are totally contrary to the evidence on record. It has also been stated by the petitioners that the need expressed by the respondent -Bank totally belies the material evidence in the shape of the strength of the employees of the Bank and the expansion so pleaded is without any foundational basis.;