Allowed

Amarjit Singh v. Harish Chander

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2009CR/4633/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a revision petition against a cryptic order by the Rent Controller dismissing an application to amend a written statement. The court directed the controller to pass a speaking order within two weeks or decide on merits.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; Rent Controller directed to pass speaking order on amendment application within two weeks; eviction petition decided on merits thereafter if amendment refused.

Amarjit Singh Vs Harish Chander — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

CR No.4633 of 2009

¶3

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CR No.4633 of 2009 (O&M) Date Of Decision: 05.10.2009 **** Amarjit Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Harish Chander . . . . 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. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for the respondent

¶13

¶14

SURYA KANT J.(ORAL)

¶15

This revision petition is directed by the tenant against the order dated 04.05.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Ludhiana dismissing his application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, for amendment of the written statement.

¶16

Counsel for the respondent-landlord points out that the application for amendment was moved at a stage when the case was ripe for final arguments.

¶17

Unfortunately, the Rent Controller, Ludhiana while dismissing the petitioner’s application for amendment of the written statement has assigned no reasons whatsoever. Neither the nature of the proceedings, the grounds of eviction or the plea which the petitioner wanted to incorporate by way of amendment, finds mention in the impugned order which can safely be termed as a cryptic and nonspeaking order.

¶18

For the reasons afore-stated, the revision petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 04.06.2009 passed by the Rent Controller,

¶19

¶20

CR No.4633 of 2009

¶21

Ludhiana, is set aside and the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, is directed to decide the application for amendment of the written statement moved by the petitioner-tenant by passing a speaking order within two weeks from the date of receipt of the certificate copy of this order. If the Rent Controller finds no ground to allow the amendment, the eviction petition shall be decided on merits within two weeks thereafter.

Dasti.

(SURYA KANT)

JUDGE

05.10.2009 shonkar

Amarjit Singh v. Harish Chander

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjit Singh v. Harish Chander

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

Sudhir Kumar Vs Kuldip Singh Malhotra

Shamsher Singh Vs Charan Dass

Baljit Singh Vs Baljinder Kaur

Santosh Sharma Vs H.S. Bawa

Vineet Dutta Vs Pooja Dutta

Rattan Lal Vs Amrik Singh