- (1.) An order of ejectment of the tenant-petitioner passed by the learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana, on 26-5-1985 on a petition under S.13-A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as amended by the Amendment Act No. 2 of 1985 (hereinafter called 'the Act') from the ground floor of the house which originally belonged to Dr. Karam Singh Dargon, deceased husband of respondent No. 1, is the subject-matter of dispute in the present revision petition.
(2.) A few facts need mention here. The house in dispute is two-storeyed and was owned by Dr. Karam Singh Dargon. Its ground-floor is occupied as a tenant by Dr. Dina Nath Gulati petitioner and it is admittedly a scheduled building. The first floor was in occupation of Amrik Singh R.W. 1 as a tenant who vacated the same in the month of December, 1980. Dr. Karam Singh Dargon was employed as a Scientist S-3 and Head, Division of Soils and Agronomy at the Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, under the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi. Prior to his deputation and ultimate absorption in the said Institute, he was an employee of the Punjab Government. On attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from the service of the Institute with effect from 28-2-1981 as is evident from the office order of even date Ex. A. 1. It is the admitted case that after his retirement Dr. Dargon, his wife and other family members occupied and lived on the first floor of the house in dispute earlier vacated by Amrik Singh R.W. 1. He filed an application dated 26-10-1981 under S.13 of the Act for the ejectment of the tenant-petitioner which was later dismissed without having been decided on merits. While the case of the petitioner is that Dr. Dargon had agreed to sell the house to him vide agreement dated 1-2-1983, marked 'A', the case of respondent No. 1 is that the application for ejectment was not pressed as the petitioner had assured that he would vacate the ground floor of the house. Dr. Dargon along with his wife later left for the U.S.A. to stay there with his sons who are settled and gainfully employed there. An advertisement dated 22-5-1983 marked 'B' appeared in the newspaper, which according to the petitioner, was for letting out first floor of the house in dispute which was lying vacant after Dr. Dargon had left for the U.S.A. Dr. Dargon while in U.S.A. died on 19-4-1983. One of his sons Jasjit Singh, who is respondent No. 2 herein, is employed in a bank. He was earlier posted at Ludhiana. Later he was transferred to some out station but is again alleged to have been reposted at Ludhiana. Smt. Santosh Kaur, widow of Dr. K.S. Dargon, came back from the U.S.A. to reside at Ludhiana. She admittedly reoccupied the first floor of the house. She filed an application for ejectment of the petitioner under S.13 of the Act which is pending. Punjab Act No. 2 of 1985 came into force on 16-11-1985 whereby some provisions beneficial to the landlords, who had retired from Government service or are about to retire, were incorporated in the Act. The relevant provisions so incorporated, which shall come up for discussion in the present case, are reproduced below :- "Section 2(hh) : "Specified landlord" means a person who is entitled to receive rent in respect of a building on his own account and who is holding or has held an appointment in a public service or post in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State." Section 13-A : Right to recover immediate possession of residential or scheduled building to accrue to certain persons : Where a specified landlord at any time, within one year prior to or within one year after the date of his retirement or after his retirement but within one year of the date of commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Amendment) Act, 1985, whichever is later, applies to the Controller along with a certificate from the authority competent to remove him from service indicating the date of his retirement and his affidavit to the effect that he does not own and possess any other suitable accommodation in the local area in which he intends to reside to recover possession of his residential building or scheduled building, as the case may be, for his own occupation, there shall accrue, on and from the date of such application to such specified landlord, notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or in any contract (whether expressed or implied) custom or usage to the contrary, a right to recover immediately the possession of such residential building or scheduled building or any part or parts of such building if it is let out in part or parts : Provided that in case of death of the specified landlord, the widow or widower of such specified landlord and in the case of death of such widow or widower, a child or a grandchild or a widowed daughter-in-law who was dependent upon such specified landlord at the time of his death shall be entitled to make an application under this Section to the Controller - (a) in the case of death of such specified landlord, before the commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Amendment) Act, 1985, within one year of such commencement; (b) in the case of death of such specified landlord, after such commencement, but before the date of his retirement, within one year of the date of his death; (c) in the case of death of such specified landlord, after such commencement and the date of his retirement, within one year of the date of such retirement; and on the date of such application the right to recover the possession of the residential building or scheduled building, as the case may be, which belonged to such specified landlord at the time of his death shall accrue to the applicant : Provided further that nothing in this Section shall be so construed as conferring a right, on any person to recover possession of more than one residential or scheduled building inclusive of any part or parts thereof if it is let out in part or parts. Provided further that the Controller may give the tenant a reasonable period for putting the specified landlord or, as the case may be, the widow, widower, child, grandchild or widowed daughter-in-taw in possession of the residential building or scheduled building, as the case may be, and may extend such time so as not to exceed three months in the aggregate." Section 18-A : Special procedure for disposal of applications under Section 13-A : (1) Every application under Section 13-A shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure specified in this Section. (2) After an application under Section 13 A is received, the Controller shall issue summons for service on the tenant in the form specified in Schedule II. (3) - - - - - 4) The tenant on whom the service of summons has been declared to have been validly made under Sub-Section (3), shall have no right to contest the prayer for eviction from the residential building or scheduled building, as the case may be, unless he files an affidavit stating the grounds on which he seeks to contest the application for eviction and obtains leave from the Controller as hereinafter provided, and in default of his appearance in pursuance of the summons or his obtaining such leave, the statement made by the specified landlord or, as the case may be, the widow, widower, child, grandchild or the widowed daughter-in-law of such specified landlord in the application for eviction shall be deemed to be admitted by the tenant and the applicant shall be entitled to an order for eviction of the tenant. (5) The Controller may give to the tenant leave to contest the application if the affidavit filed by the tenant discloses such facts as would disentitle the specified landlord or, as the case may be, the widow, widower, child, grandchild or widowed daughter-in-law of such specified landlord from obtaining an order for the recovery of possession of the residential building or scheduled building, as the case may be, under Section 13-A. (6) Where leave is granted to the tenant to contest the application, the Controller shall commence the hearing on a date not later than one month from the date on which the leave is granted to the tenant to contest and shall hear the application from day to day till the hearing is concluded and application decided. (7) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Controller shall while holding an inquiry in a proceeding to which this Section applies including the recording of evidence, follow the practice and procedure of a Court of Small Causes. (8) No appeal or second appeal shall lie against an order for the recovery of possession of any residential building or scheduled building made by the Controller in accordance with the procedure specified in this Section : Provided that the High Court may, for the purpose of satisfying itself that an order made by the Controller under this Section is according to law, call for the records of the case and pass such order in respect thereto as it thinks fit. (9) Save as otherwise provided in this Section the procedure for the disposal of an application for eviction under Section 13-A shall be the same as the procedure for the disposal of application by the Controller." "Section 18-B : Section 18-A to have overriding effect : Section 18-A or any rule made for the purpose thereof shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained elsewhere in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force. Section 19. Penalties : (1) and (2) - - - (2-A) : The specified landlord or the widow, widower, child, grandchild or widowed daughter-in-law of such landlord, as the case may be, who having evicted a tenant from a residential building or a scheduled building in pursuance of an order made under Section 13-A does not occupy it for a continuous period of three months from the date of such eviction, or lets out the whole or any part of such building from which the tenant was evicted to any person other than the tenant in contravention of the provisions of Sub-Section (4-A) of Section 13, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or both."
(3.) Respondent No. 1 claiming herself to be the widow of a specified landlord and respondent No. 2 as the son of a specified landlord filed an application under S.13-A of the Act to recover possession of the ground floor of the house in dispute from the petitioner. On being served with the summons of this application the petitioner applied for leave to defend, which was granted to him by the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller did not frame any issues and applied the procedure prescribed for a Court of Small Causes under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, and after appreciating the evidence adduced by the parties held that respondent No. 1 had a right to recover possession of the premises in dispute from the petitioner and allowed her application. He, however, held that respondent No. 2, in the presence of respondent No. 1, had no right to file an application under S.13-A ibid and dismissed the application on his behalf. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner under the proviso to Sub-Sec. (8) of S.18-A ibid.;