Hot Millions told to vacate workshop in Industrial Area

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, February 1

Partly allowing a petition filed against Hot Millions, the court of Judicial Magistrate Ashish Thathai has ordered vacation of a shed in Industrial Area occupied by the food chain since 1996. The shed houses a workshop of Hot Millions from where food is transferred to its outlets in the city.

“On the grounds of personal bona fide necessity of the petitioners and arrears of rent, two-month time is given to Hot Millions to vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises, which is Industrial Shed No. 657, Industrial Area, Phase I, Chandigarh, from the date of this order,” said the court.

The petitioners, Rajesh Budhiraja, a resident of Sector 33-A, and Rachna Arora, a resident of Sector 19-A, had filed a case in court against Hot Millions, through its partner Mohan Bir Singh, a resident of Sector 9-B, and others.

The petition was filed under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for eviction of respondents from the industrial shed.

Advocate RK Handa averred that the petitioners were the co-owners and co-landlords of the property. The ground floor of the demised premises, having a 3,950 sq ft covered area, was let out to Hot Millions through Colonel AB Singh vide a registered lease deed dated January 8, 1996, by Amar Nath Budhiraja and Sons. The said lease deed was executed for a period of 10 years, commencing from February 1, 1996.

The lease/rent for the first year was fixed at Rs 40,000 per month with an annual increase of 5 per cent and the lease money was Rs 62,000 per month.

After the death of Amar Nath Budhiraja on June 14, 2005, his legal heir Rajesh Budhiraja met Colonel AB Singh and demanded payment of arrears of rent, which was refused.

In the order, Judicial Magistrate Ashish Thathai stated that the petitioners in the case have pleaded that they required the demised premises for their personal use and occupation as they wanted to start their own business. “There is nothing on record to show that the plea taken by the petitioners is fancy and whimsical. It is held that the petitioners require the demised premises for their bona fide personal use. Accordingly, the issue is decided in favour of the petitioners,” said the court.