Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (II of 1973) Section 13 – Respondent-landlord intends to start a business by combining both the shops – Thus, no adverse inference can be drawn against her – Regarding the daughter-in-law not being in a position to join the landlady – Ground taken in the eviction petition was the personal necessity of the landlord herself – Even if the daughter-in-law does not join the business, it makes no difference – Personal necessity pleaded is of the land-lady herself and, thus, the tenant cannot draw any benefit from this alleged fact.
PLRonline 417553
LogIn / Subscribe to read Full Notes and judgment
