Jagdish Prasad vs Mehar Chand and others

Gokal Chand Mital, J.—The only point raised in this petition is that earlier in the year 1978 the landlord had sought ejectment of the tenant on the ground that he required additional accommodation as his daughter, who had become widow was to live with him alongwith her children, and the present ejectment which was filed on 30th November, 1982 was not competent.

The earlier application was dismissed by the Rent Controller on 6th August, 1979 vide Exhibit R 3 after recording a finding that the daughter and her children had not started living with the landlord. But, now both the Courts below have found that they are living with the landlord. It has been held by this Court that under the changed circumstances, ground of personal necessity can be renewed. Hence, the second application on changed grounds is maintainable.

Adverting to the merits of the case, the landlord has only a Barsati and Miani with him without having other facilities and amenities for proper living. After the landlord''s daughter became widow, she along with her children came to stay in his house and for accomdating them the Courts below rightly came to the conclusion that the accommodation with the landlord was wholly insufficient. By the time evidence was being led, the daughter with three children was living with the landlord as other children had either got married or have gone out in service. It is true that the landlord has died during the pendency of the revision petition. He is succeeded by his widow, widowed daughter and her children from whom the accomodation sought for is needed.

Finding no merit in this revision, the same is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. However, a month''s time is granted to the tenant to vacate the premises in dispute.