IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.8482 of 2010 Date of decision: 24th December, 2010 Harbans Lal … Petitioner Versus Parveen Kumar … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. H.K. Aurora, Advocate for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Respondent-landlord had filed an eviction petition seeking ejectment of the petitioner-tenant on the following grounds: (1) The petitioner was in arrears of rent since 1st March, 2006 till filing of the eviction petition at the rate of Rs.400/- per month. (2) The premises was required for settling the son of respondent-landlord, who was unemployed and had obtained necessary expertise and qualification for running the business of computers. (3) The tenant had changed the use of the property without consent of the landlord. The Rent Controller, Jalandhar held that the arrears of rent were paid in the Court, hence, the tender was valid, and therefore, the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent was decided against the landlord. Regarding the change of use, no evidence was led by the landlord and the same was also decided against him. However, Civil Revision No.8482 of 2010 considering the evidence of the landlord, who stepped into the witness box as PW-1 and his son Mukesh Kumar PW-2, the Rent Controller held that the ground of personal necessity has been proved. This finding has also been affirmed by the appellate Court below. Counsel for the petitioner has very fairly stated that since a concurrent finding of fact has been recorded against the petitioner-tenant and the ground of personal necessity has been upheld, he will not press the present revision petition. However, he has craved the indulgence of this Court to make an alternative arrangement. Counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner-tenant is running a shop and is having a huge inventory, therefore, a sufficient time be granted to him to clear the same and find-out an alternative business premises. I find merit in the alternative prayer made by counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, as prayed, the present revision petition is hereby dismissed as not pressed. However, the petitioner-tenant is granted eight months’ time to hand over the actual physical peaceful vacant possession of the premises to the respondent-landlord, subject to his filing an undertaking to this effect in the Court of Rent Controller, Jalandhar. The undertaking shall further state that the petitioner shall pay the rent of following months in advance on or before the 7th day of each month and that the entire arrears of rent shall be paid. The undertaking be filed on or before 15th January, 2011. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE December 24, 2010 rps 2