J.V.GUPTA, J. - (1.) THIS is landlord's petition whose ejectment application has been dismissed by both the courts below.
(2.) THE landlord/petitioner sought the ejectment of his tenant primarily on the ground that he required the demised premises for his own use and occupation. The said application has been dismissed by both the courts below. During the pendency of this petition, Civil Miscellaneous No. 197-CII/1986, dated 13.1.1986, was filed by the petitioner for grant of permission to argue a fresh ground of ejectment made available to him because of the amendment of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, i.e., on account of the landlord being a specified landlord under the amended Act. Notice of this application was given to the learned counsel for the respondent/tenant. Although no reply to the same was filed but it was contended that the landlord may move before the Rent Controller a fresh application under the new provision of law if available to him, because that will require investigation into certain facts. On this representation, learned counsel for the landlord/petitioner submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw his petition with a permission to file a fresh ejectment application under the amended Act on the ground of being a specified landlord. Under these circumstances, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a permission to the petitioner to file a fresh application for ejectment if permissible under the amended law as noticed above.
(3.) ANY finding given earlier by the Authorities below shall not stand in the way of the landlord to seek ejectment on the ground of bonafide requirement. Order accordingly.;