Allowed

M/S Amardas Automobile Parts v. Geeta Khosla

Delhi HC22 May 2018RC.REV./103/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court, upon the respondent conceding triable issues in an eviction matter, granted leave to contest to the petitioner, set aside the eviction order refusing leave, and revived proceedings before the additional Rent Controller for expedited disposal considering the respondent's age and disability.

What did the court decide?

Leave to contest granted, impugned order set aside, proceedings revived before Additional Rent Controller for further proceedings on due date.

M/S Amardas Automobile Parts Vs Geeta Khosla — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RC.REV. 103/2016 and CM No. 5364/2016 (stay)

¶4

M/S AMARDAS AUTOMOBILE PARTS ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Prag Chawla, Mr. Sudeep Sudan and Mr. Nikhil Sharma, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

GEETA KHOSLA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharma and Mr. Nitish Sharma, Advs. with respondent in person.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA O R D E R % 22.05.2018

¶9

After some hearing, the counsel for the respondent who was the petitioner before the Rent Controller in the eviction case which was allowed by order dated 08.12.2015, after rejection of the application of the petitioner for leave to contest, on instructions, fairly concedes that triable issues arise and, therefore, the leave to contest may be granted and the revision petition may be allowed and the impugned order dated 08.12.2015, may be set aside with all consequential directions to follow this, of course, without prejudice to the contentions of both sides.

¶10

In view of the above, the petition and the applications filed therewith stand allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The leave to contest to the petitioner stands granted. The proceedings before the RC.REV. 103/2016 page 1 of 2

¶11

Additional Rent Controller consequentially stand revived. They shall be taken up by the Additional Rent Controller for further proceedings in accordance with law on 11^th July, 2018, when the parties are directed to remain present.

¶12

Needless to add, the petitioner shown as respondent in the eviction case will be obliged to submit the written statement on the afore-said date fixed for first appearance.

¶13

Given the age (64 years) of the respondent landlady and physically handicap that she statedly suffers, it is desirable that the eviction petition is decided on merits, after the trial, expeditiously. The trial court will make all endeavours towards that end, it, however, depending on cooperation from the counsel for both sides which is assured by each of them.

¶14

The petition and the application filed therewith are disposed of in above terms.

R.K.GAUBA, J.

MAY 22, 2018/ uj

page 2 of 2

RC.REV. 103/2016

M/S Amardas Automobile Parts v. Geeta Khosla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Amardas Automobile Parts v. Geeta Khosla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kulbhushan Jain Vs Sumitra Devi Malik

M/S Amba Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pran Nath Mehta & Ors.

Suvinder Kaur Vs Surinder Kumar Khanna

Ranbir Singh & Anr. Vs Sheoji Ram ( Deceased) Thr His Lrs

Tirath Singh Vs Gurcharan Singh

Dinesh Dayal Vs Yoeshwar Dayal ( Since Deceased Thr Lrs ) & Ors.