Authorities Under Rent Act To Only Ascertain If Premises Are Bonafidely Required By Landlord, Can't Embark On Roving Enquiry: Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that it cannot embark on a roving and fishing enquiry to assist a party to collect evidence.The remarks were made while dealing with a revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Rent Controller whereby the application for directing the respondents-landlord to produce relevant documents in their possession was dismissed. The present petition is nothing but an endeavour to embark on an endeavour not relevant to the matter in dispute. A Court would not embark on a roving and fishing enquiry in order to assist a party to collect evidence.The Respondent-Landlord filed an ejectment petition seeking eviction of the Petitioner-Tenant from the shop in question on the ground of bonafide personal necessity of the husband of landlord (also General Power Attorney holder), stated to be unemployed.The petitioner filed a reply stating therein that the landlord and her family members are in fact members and owners in possession of many shops and commercial properties and that they are engaged in the business of property dealing. An application was filed by the tenant for directing the said husband to produce his PAN card, Income Tax returns, etc. The bench comprising Justice Alka Sarin while dismissing the petition held that under the Rent Act, authorities are concerned with whether the premises are bonafidely required by the landlord for his or his family's personal bonafide need or not. Whether the husband is employed or not and whether he is filing income tax returns or not is of no significance."The relevance of the documents especially the income tax returns eludes this Court. It is trite that what is required in law is that the Court below should record its satisfaction as to whether the documents are necessary or not. In the present case a categoric observation has been made that the tenant-petitioner is trying to collect evidence through the process of the Court which cannot be allowed."The Court also noted that the Petitioner had confronted the GPA holder when he stepped into the witness box with all the documents which are now sought to be produced.It concluded that the documents put to the witness have already been admitted by him in his cross-examination and the documents being sought are not pertaining to the landlord-respondents but rather to the GPA holder (husband). Therefore, the petition was dismissed for being sans merit.Case Title: Munshi Ram versus Vidya Devi and AnotherCitation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 121Click Here To Read/Download Order

Authorities Under Rent Act To Only Ascertain If Premises Are Bonafidely Required By Landlord, Can't Embark On Roving Enquiry: Punjab & Haryana HC

Drishti Yadav

Tags