- (1.) This is revision against the orders passed by Rent Controller, Phagwara and Appellate Authority, Kapurthala whereby petition under Section 13 of East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949 filed by landlordsrespondents, Amrik Singh and Mohan Singh, was allowed and revision petitioners were directed to vacate the demised premises on the ground of personal bona fide need of landlords-respondents.
(2.) Landlords-Respondents projected the need of demised premises for their personal bona fide necessity as follows:- "iii) Applicants/landlords require the shop in dispute for starting business for Indrejit Singh son of Mohan Singh, who is married. The said son of Mohan Singh has grown up and completed his studies. They are able to open new shops for earning their livelihood and they want to be self reliant. Further applicants stated that above said son has not to do any work at present. Applicants themselves run Halwai shop near the old Loha Mandi road and there is no scope for the applicants to get adjusted their children in the same shop. The present premises in dispute is situated within the market and there is good scope of Sweet business. Further applicants stated that all the three shops are of small size. They have filed ejectment petition against other tenants also. Further applicants stated that they have not any suitable accommodation for fulfilling the requirement of their children. Applicants have not got vacated any building or layout any building within the last six months from the day of filing of the present petition."
(3.) Revision petitioners contested the plea of landlords-respondents qua projecting their need for demised premises with the plea that they do not require the shop in dispute for starting any business. Inderjit Singh, for whom the shop is sought to be vacated, is already doing business of sweet at the shop owned by landlords-respondents at Loha Mandi Road, Phagwara which is a big shop and having a lucrative business. Landlords-respondents have four more shops on G.T. Road with chaubaras, which are in their possession. They also have other residential building of 12 marlas in their possession in front of the shop in dispute. Shops in possession of landlordsrespondents are more than enough for their business.;