Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.@mdashThe petitioner is a tenant, who was sought to be evicted by the landlord, after his retirement, by filing an eviction petition u/s 13A of Act III of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. The Rent Controller, Hoshiarpur, vide impugned order dated 3.5.2010, has declined the application of the petitioner/tenant for leave to contest the eviction proceedings.
2. The impugned order, whereby leave to contest was declined, is being assailed on two grounds by Learned Counsel for the petitioner. Firstly, the landlord has not placed on record the certificate issued by the employer to the effect that he had retired. Secondly, even if leave to contest is declined, then the Court has to satisfy regarding the bonafide requirement of the landlord.
3. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Controlling Authority i.e. District Controller, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Nawanshahr, has issued a certificate to the effect that the landlord, who is working as an Inspector in the department, is going to retire. Secondly, even if leave to contest is declined, the Rent Controller can examine the landlord to satisfy himself as to whether his necessity is bonafide or not.
4. In the present case, the landlord has specifically stated that he is not having any residential house within the municipal limits of Hoshiarpur and the house alleged by the tenant, falls in village Ajjowal, constructed over a shamlat land. There was no denial to the averment that the landlord was not having any house in the municipal limits of Hoshiarpur.
5. Hence, the impugned order dated 3.5.2010, passed by the Rent Controller, Hoshiarpur, suffers from no infirmity and the present revision petition is hereby dismissed, in limine.
