D.S.TIWATIA, J. - (1.) NATHI Ram landlord (respondent herein), sought ejectment of Des Raj Kohli, tenant (petitioner herein) from the demised house on ground of personal necessity of his own and his family. The Rent Controller allowed the petition and order ejectment. This order was sustained by the Appellate Authority, and the appeal of the tenant was dismissed. Hence the present revision petition at the instance of the tenant.
(2.) MR . Sandhu, appearing for the tenant, has canvassed that after the filing of the ejectment application, the landlord had sold four houses i.e. Nos. 2075-2078 in the very town in which the demised premises is located. this fact the has admitted in his cross-examination by appearing as his own witness. In view of the said development after the filing of the petition, the courts below should have dealt with the said aspect of the case and given a finding as to whether the premises that were sold were residential buildings or non-residential ones, and whether these buildings were sold to the tenant, occupant thereof, or anybody else. The statement of Nathi Ram, when translated into English, read as follows:- "It is correct that house and shop Nos. 2075-2078 had been sold by me after the filing of the present petition. These had one room each. I have not filed any eviction petition for getting them vacated. Girdhari Lal lives in 2075-76. These houses had been sold by me seven/eight months ago." In my opinion, the Rent Controller out to have taken notice of this statement of the landlord, and, if need be got the matters clarified as to whether the buildings sold were house-cum-shop or they were separate houses and shop ; what was the accommodation, and to whom these were sold. In the interest of justice, therefore, I direct the Rent Controller to give his finding on the following points :- (a) Whether the four buildings in question sold by the landlord were shop-cum-houses or residential buildings ? (b) Whether all these or any one of the said buildings were sold to the tenants living therein or to somebody else ? (c) What was the accommodation in each such buildings, as also the combined accommodation of all the four buildings? (d) When these buildings were sold, were they in occupation of the tenants, and were the same sold to them ? In case the same had not been sold to the tenants themselves, whether the vendees had been put in vacant possession thereof or they were given just symbolic possession ? The Rent Controller shall submit his report in this regard after recording evidence that may be adduced by both the parties within three months from the date they appear before him.
(3.) THE parties shall appear before the Rent Controller on 20th May, 1986. The case be listed again after receipt of the report of the Rent Controller. Case remanded.;