CR No.2567 of 2025 S. No.130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR No.2567 of 2025 Date of Decision: 29.04.2025 Mohan Lal (since deceased) through his LRs .....Pe33oners Vs. Hindu Siksha Sami3, Sanskri3 Bhawan, District Kurukshetra .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mrs. Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate with Ms. Anjali Rani, Advocate for the peoners. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral) Rent peon under Secon 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Evicon) Act, 1973 was filed by landlord – Hindu Siksha Sami (respondent herein) seeking ejectment of the tenant – Mohan Lal - since deceased (now peoner through his LRs) on the ground of non-payment of the house-tax; the demised shop having become unfit for human habitaon; and bonafide necessity. The peon was filed in January, 2015 and the same was resisted by the tenant. 2. Learned Rent Controller vide its order dated 31.05.2019, though declined the ejectment on the ground of non-payment; or the premises having become unfit for human habitaon but allowed the ejectment on the ground of bonafide necessity of the landlord. The tenant was granted the period of five months so as to vacate the premises as per the order dated 31.05.2019. The appeal as filed by the tenant has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority by way of the impugned order dated 17.03.2025. Page No.1 out of 3 pages RENU 2025.04.29 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.2567 of 2025 3. Assailing the afore-said orders, it is contended by learned counsel that the landlord i.e. respondent herein has 25 acres of land, which can be used for converng the same into parking. Besides, there is another gate at Point `A’ in site plan Ex.P12 from the side of Salarpur Road, which can also be used by the landlord – Hindu Siksha Sami and, as such, the bonafide need as projected by the landlord was a mere wish/ desire, which cannot be taken as a bonafide necessity so as to jusfy the ejectment of the tenant. 4. A?er hearing learned counsel for the peoner- tenant at considerable length, this Court does not find merit in the contenon. As has been observed by the Courts below, the landlord has number of shops in Geeta School Market, including the demised shop, which the landlord wants to demolish so as to convert the same in vacant land for the purpose of parking of the vehicles of the students, visitors, parents, staff, school buses etc., and for that purpose, a big entry gate is required to be installed. As per the specific case of the landlord, the demised shop along with the adjoining shops are located on the main railway road and so, entry gate is required to be installed for the entry of vehicles from the Railway Road Side and as the demised shop is situated on the front side, it is required to be vacated because the vacant land situated at the backside cannot be used for entry of the vehicles. 5. It has also been noced by the Courts below that strength of the school has increased a lot due to which the need of the landlord has become genuine. It has been rightly observed that the tenant has no right to dictate to the landlord as to how it should ulize its property. 6. This Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the findings as recorded by the Courts below. 7. In view of the above circumstances, when this Court was not inclined to grant any relief to the peoner- tenant, learned counsel prayed to grant a period of four years to the peoner so as to vacate the demised shop. Page No.2 out of 3 pages RENU 2025.04.29 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.2567 of 2025 8. The me sought by the learned counsel for vacang the shop by the peoner is absolutely unreasonable. As noced earlier that ejectment peon was filed in January, 2015 and the same was allowed in May, 2019 and five months’ me was granted to the tenant to vacate the shop. Instead of vacang the shop, he filed the appeal, which has since been dismissed on 17.03.2025. 9. Considering all the facts and circumstances and the fact that the peoner is running the demised shop for the last several years, a period of three months’ is granted so as to vacate the demised shop. It is directed that the tenant- peoners herein shall vacate the demised shop on or before 31.07.2025 posively. In case peoner (s) fail to do so, and the landlord is compelled to file execuon for geGng the demised shop vacated, then the peoner- tenants will have to pay user charges @ ₹50,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.08.2025 onwards ll the demised shop is actually vacated. Disposed of accordingly.. April 29, 2025 (DEEPAK GUPTA) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Page No.3 out of 3 pages RENU 2025.04.29 18:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh