IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.7745 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 29th November, 2010 Monu … Petitioner Versus Shanti … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Mani Ram Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Both the Courts below have ordered eviction of the petitioner-tenant from one room let-out to him by the respondent-landlady. The landlady is 75 years old and has five sons, namely Madan, Naurang, Rajender, Ram Narayan and Rajpal. Out of the five sons, three are married. Two married sons are residing separately in the same city having their own mess. One son, namely Madan, who is married and is having two sons namely Abhishek and Rajesh aged 7 and 2 years respectively, is residing along with the respondent-landlady. Two un- married sons are also residing in the same house. As per the concurrent finding of fact returned by both the Courts below, the respondent-landlady is having only two rooms in her possession. This finding of fact recorded by both the Courts below is sought to be dislodged by counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the site plan, a photostat copy whereof has been shown to me. It is stated that in front of two rooms, there is a verandah and the same is covered, thus, the verandah should be construed as two Civil Revision No.7745 of 2010 (O&M) separate rooms and hence, this Court should come to a conclusion that the respondent-landlady is having four rooms in her possession. The site plan has been proved by Kanwar Lal Draftsman PW-3. He was cross-examined. Both the Courts below have held in categoric terms that the landlady is in possession of two rooms. Even if for the sake of arguments, the contention of counsel for the petitioner is upheld, then also two sons, who are married, will often visit the landlady. The petitioner is a tenant only in one room. No justifiable cause is made out for the petitioner to retain that room when the respondent-landlady is having a large family to live with her. Hence, the present petition is dismissed in limine. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE November 29, 2010 rps 2