Allowed

Santosh Sharma v. H.S. Bawa

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2009CR/3371/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court, Punjab and Haryana allowed a revision petition against an ex parte order dismissing a tenant's application to set aside an earlier ex parte order. The court set aside both orders subject to conditions including costs, deposit of arrears, continuing rent payment, filing of written statement, limiting evidence opportunities, and ordering early disposal.

What did the court decide?

Set aside orders dated 14.05.2009 and 14.06.2007 subject to conditions of payment of costs, deposit of arrears, compliance with rent demands, filing of written statement, and summary disposal within s

Santosh Sharma Vs H.S. Bawa — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

CR No.3371 of 2009

¶3

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CR No.3371 of 2009 Date Of Decision: 05.10.2009 **** Santosh Sharma . . . . Petitioner VS. H.S. Bawa . . . . Respondent

¶6

¶7

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT

¶8

¶9

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶10

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶11

¶12

Present: Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amit Parashar, Advocate for the respondent

¶13

¶14

SURYA KANT J.(ORAL)

¶15

(1). This Revision Petition is directed by the tenant against the order dated 14th May, 2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby her application to set aside the ex parte order dated 14th June, 2007 has been dismissed.

¶16

(2). Notice of motion was issued and pursuant thereto counsel for the respondent-landlord is present and has been heard.

¶17

(3). It is true that the petitioner-tenant failed to give any satisfactory explanation for her non-appearance before the Rent Controller which led to initiation of the ex parte proceedings against her.

¶18

(4). At the same time, with a view to afford fair opportunity to the petitioner to defend herself and in the interest of justice, the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 14.05.2009 as well as the ex parte order dated 14.06.2007 are set aside subject to the following conditions:-

¶19

¶20

CR No.3371 of 2009

¶21

i. a sum of Rs.5000/- as costs, shall be paid by the petitioner-tenant to the respondent-landlord who is a senior citizen of 82 years of age;

¶22

ii. the petitioner-tenant shall deposit the arrears of rent, if any, within one month from today with the Rent Controller;

¶23

iii. the petitioner-tenant shall continue to pay the future rent to the respondent-landlord before 10th day of every calendar month by way of demand draft in the name of the respondent-landlord;

¶24

iv. the petitioner-tenant shall file her written statement on the next date of hearing and no further opportunity shall be granted for this purpose;

¶25

v. not more than 4 opportunities each shall be granted to both the parties to lead their respective evidences;

¶26

vi. The Rent Controller shall make an endeavour to decide the eviction petition as early as possible and preferably within six months of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶27

vii. In the event of non-compliance of any of the conditions No.(i) to (iv) above, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, without any further reference to the Bench.

(5).

(6).

Disposed of.

Dasti.

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE

¶33

¶34

CR No.3371 of 2009

¶35

05.10.2009 shonkar

Santosh Sharma v. H.S. Bawa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Sharma v. H.S. Bawa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir Kumar Vs Kuldip Singh Malhotra

Shamsher Singh Vs Charan Dass

Baljit Singh Vs Baljinder Kaur

Amarjit Singh Vs Harish Chander

Vineet Dutta Vs Pooja Dutta

Rattan Lal Vs Amrik Singh