The Court dismissed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, upholding finding that a family partition occurred and the petitioner was not the landlord of the respondent in the premises.
Civil Revision No. 3356 of 2007 dismissed with no error in findings recorded by courts below.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 3356 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.04.2009
Prahalad Singh
.............Petitioner
Vs.
Sumer Chand
............Respondent
Present: Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate for the respondent.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
-.-
K.KANNAN, J. (ORAL)
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
April 15, 2009 Pankaj*
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition for eviction under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 can be maintained when there has been a partition of the family and the premises were all
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prahalad Singh
Sumer Chand
K. Kannan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
