Total Pageviews

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Ejectment--Bonafide necessity--Landlady required premises in order to look after her married daughter who has handicapped husband and also other members of her-in-law family

2010(1) LAW HERALD (P&H) 407
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. D. Anand
Civil Revision No. 1955 of 2008
Kanta Rani
v.
Ashok Kumar
{Decided on 18/01/2010}
For the Petitioner: Ms. Shweta Bawa, Advocate for Mr. Sushma Chopra, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. A.S, Gill, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Ejectment--Bonafide necessity--Landlady required premises in order to look after her married daughter who has handicapped husband and also other members of her-in-law family--A decree of ejectment cannot be validly declined to landlady just because her daughter is happen to be married--Landlady has no other family member to support or look after--Son-in-law of landlady was suffering from 100% disability--Ejectment ordered.
East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13--Ejectment--Bonafide necessity--Landlady required premises in order to look after her married daughter who has handicapped husband and also other members of her-in-law family--Her averment cannot be said to be suffering from want of bonafides just because her daughter happens to be married--A decree of ejectment cannot be validly declined to landlady on above count--Landlady has no other family member to support or look after--Son-in-law of landlady was suffering from 100% disability--Order of trial Court of ejectment restored and reversal thereof by learned appellate authority set aside. (P.8 & 11)