Eviction requires proof of landlord-tenant relationship and compliance with mandatory three-month statutory notice periods.

The petitioners (landlords) claimed ownership of suit accommodation (Khasra No. 685/6) previously owned by Smt. Rechal Mantero, who died intestate and issue-less in 2009

The petitioners mutated the property in their names in 2018 and served an eviction notice to Respondent No. 1 on 12-09-2019

They subsequently filed an application for eviction under Section 12 of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011 ("the Act") on 13-11-2019, alleging bona fide personal need

Respondent No. 1 denied the landlord-tenant relationship, asserting he was maintaining the property and had never paid rent to the petitioners

Both the Rent Controller and the Rent Control Tribunal rejected the eviction application, finding no evidence of a landlord-tenant relationship and noting the failure to provide the mandatory three-month statutory notice

The petitioners challenged these concurrent findings under Article 227 of the Constitution

1. Whether the petitioners established a landlord-tenant relationship with Respondent No. 1 as defined under Section 2(5) of the Act

2. Whether the eviction application was valid despite the failure to serve a mandatory three-month notice as required under Serial No. 11(g) of Schedule 2 of the Act

Section 2(5) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011, which defines a "landlord" as a person receiving or entitled to receive rent for an accommodation

Section 12(2) read with Serial No. 11(g) of Schedule 2 of the Act, which mandates that a landlord must provide three months' written notice to a tenant if the accommodation is required for personal occupation

precedent Sheela and others v. Firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash regarding the proof of landlord-tenant relationships

The Court found that the petitioners failed to produce any documentary evidence, such as a rent agreement or rent receipts, to establish a landlord-tenant relationship

It highlighted the admission by Petitioner No. 2 (Ku. Shashilata Markus) that Respondent No. 1 had never paid rent to the applicants, which contradicted the claim of tenancy

Regarding the statutory notice, the Court observed that the notice was served on 12-09-2019, yet the eviction application was filed on 13-11-2019

This timeline confirmed that the application was filed before the expiry of the mandatory three-month notice period required under Serial No. 11(g) of Schedule 2 of the Act

the Court determined that the findings of the lower authorities were based on evidence and lacked any perversity

The Court held that the petitioners failed to establish the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship and failed to comply with the mandatory three-month notice period required for eviction on grounds of personal necessity under Section 12(2) and Schedule 2 of the Act

No relief was granted to the petitioners