VINOD K.SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 5.10.2000 passed by the Appellate Authority, Hoshiarpur vide which the order of ejectment passed by the learned Rent Controller, Hoshiarpur, was set aside and the petition filed by the landlord-petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner-landlord filed a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for eviction of the tenant on the plea that Didar Singh son of Mohinder Singh had taken the shop in question on rent in pursuance of the rent-deed dated 20.11.1995 at a monthly of Rs. 150/-. It was averred that Didar Singh died on 7.3.1995 and thereafter the respondents i.e. widow and sons of late Didar Singh came in possession of the demised shop being his legal representatives. It was further averred in the rent petition that Didar Singh had been running the business of spare parts in the shop in dispute upto December, 1994. After his death none of the respondents ever opened the shop for running any business and it remained closed since 1994. It was further claimed that the rent for the month of December, 1994 was not paid by late Shri Didar Singh and after his death none of the respondents ever made the payment of rent in spite of demand. It was also claimed that the petitioner was an old man and only bread winner in the family and he is not doing anything at present due to skin alergy. The eviction of the respondents was sought on the following grounds :- "(i) Respondents are in arrears of the rent of the disputed shop along with interest at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month w.e.f. 1.12.1994 up to the date of filing of the present application along with interest thereover. (ii) The respondents have ceased to occupy the disputed shop without any reasonable cause and the shop is closed since December, 1994. (iii) Requirement of the applicant of the disputed shop for his personal necessity as he is to run hardware business in the same in order to earn his livelihood."
(2.) THE petitioner also pleaded that he has not vacated any such premises within the urban area of Hoshiarpur after the commencement of the Act nor he is in possession of any such premises within the local limits of Municipal area of Hoshiarpur. The petition was contested by the respondents by filing reply in which the rate of rent was admitted. However, the rent-deed dated 20.11.1995 was denied. The main plea taken by the respondents was that earlier Didar Singh was running business of spare parts in the demised premises till he suffered brain haemorrhage and paralytic attack and after his death his legal heirs were running the same business during the ailment of Didar Singh. It was further claimed that the respondents offered the payment of rent to the petitioner, but he refused to accept the same. However, on the first date of hearing, the rent from December, 1994 was tendered. It was also claimed that the rent was even sent through money order which was refused by the petitioner. The ailment of the petitioner was also disputed and it was denied that he was only the bread winner in the family. It was also claimed that the petitioner owns a shop in front of the Tehsil Complex and is in possession of the same. It was further submitted that petitioner has a house on the back side of the said shop and therefore, it was claimed that the eviction petition be dismissed. In the replication, it was claimed that the tender was short and invalid and the facutm of shop in front of Tehsil Complex was denied by claiming it to be a store.
(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :- "1. Whether the respondents are liable to be evicted from the disputed shop on following grounds :- 1(a) Respondents being in arrears of rent ? OPA 1(b) Respondents having ceased to occupy the shop without any reasonable cause ? OPA 1(c) Requirement of the applicants of the disputed shop for personal bona fide necessity ? OPA 2. Whether no cause of action has accrued to the applicants to file the present application ? OPA 3. Relief." ;