Allowed

Parmeshwari Devi & Ors. v. Shankar & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Nov 2008CR/4508/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court decided the core legal issue in a batch of 13 connected revision petitions regarding claim of landlordship under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC by referring parties to apply the facts, analysis, and conclusion of a connected revision petition.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed by transposing orders and conclusions from a connected revision petition; contentions and analysis of that earlier case are accepted as part of this order.

Parmeshwari Devi & Ors. Vs Shankar… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

CR No.4508 of 2006 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Civil Revision No. 4508 of 2006 Date of decision: 03.11.2008

¶4

Shrimati Parmeshwari Devi etc. ....Petitioners

Shankar and others

...Respondents

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia

¶9

...

¶10

Present:Shri B.S. Bedi, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶11

Shri Arun Palli, Senior Advocate with Shri Jai Bhagwan, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

¶12

...

¶13

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.( Oral)

¶14

Respondents had filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC which was allowed by the Rent Controller. Aggrieved against the same, petitioners have preferred the present revision petition.

¶15

Counsel for the parties have agreed that for determination of the core issue and the controversy only a question of law has arisen whether in a petition filed by the landlord, by invoking Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, another person can claim himself to be a landlord qua the same tenant or not?. This legal issue is to be decided by the Court in 13 connected revision petitions. Counsel state that for deciding the revision petitions, facts from Civil Revision No.4048 of 2006 Smt.Parmeshwari Devi etc. v.

¶16

CR No.4508 of 2006 [2]

¶17

Shri Jiwan Lal and others' can be taken for facility of reference.

¶18

Counsel for the parties stated in agreement that facts of each case need not to be mentioned and their contentions noticed in one case will be the same in other cases. Therefore, they have submitted that taking facts of one case, ratio of law shall apply to other cases.

¶19

In view of this, this revision petition is allowed in the same terms as in Civil Revision No.4048 of 2006 and the contentions raised by counsel for the parties noticed therein, analysis thereto and the final conclusion as per agreement of the counsel stand transposed in this case. Orders passed in Civil Revision No.4048 of 2006, be read as part of this order.

¶20

(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge

¶21

03.11.2008

¶22

Parmeshwari Devi & Ors. v. Shankar & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmeshwari Devi & Ors. v. Shankar & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chanderwati and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Balwant Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

State of Haryana Vs Nanha Ram

State of Punjab and Anr. Vs Gurmej Kaur and Anr.

State of Punjab Vs Gurmej Kaur

Jagir Singh Vs State of Punjab ( O & M)