Civil Revision No.657 of 2011(O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:28.07.2011 Dalbir Singh ....petitioner Versus Surjit Singh .....respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.B.R.Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner *** RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.(ORAL): This is tenant's revision petition challenging the impugned order of eviction dated 16.09.2009 passed by Rent Controller, Baba Bakala and the order dated 26.10.2010, whereby appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by the Appellate Authority, Amritsar. Shorn off the unnecessary details, it is suffice to say that both the courts below, on appreciation of evidence on record have recorded a finding of fact that the demises premises were required by the respondent-landlord for his personal bona fide necessity. The aforesaid finding is essentially a finding of fact. Counsel for the petitioner could not point out any material irregularity or error in the orders passed by the Courts below. In fact, the objection taken before the courts below by the tenant-petitioner was to the extent that respondent-landlord was having another shop. However, it is undisputed that the other shop was acquired Civil Revision No.657 of 2011(O & M) 2 by the State Government and thus the tenant-petitioner was unable to substantiate his plea. No error can be found with the impugned orders. Dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE 28.07.2011 neenu