In this civil revision, the High Court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to the Rent Controller's order declining an application to issue a notice for handwriting comparison. The court held that no ground existed to interfere with the Controller's discretion.
The petition challenging the Rent Controller's order was dismissed.
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.1786 of 2010
Date of decision: 20th August, 2010
Pinki Rani alias Danial Kumar
… Petitioner
Versus
Anil Mahajan
… Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Present: Mr. Rahul Chhatwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Aman Kashyap, Advocate for the respondent.
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
Present petition has been filed assailing the order (Annexure P-5) dated 17th February, 2010 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby application filed by the petitioner was declined, in which a prayer was made that the respondent-tenant be asked to write in Hindi or English and that writing be sent for comparison to the handwriting expert. The respondent-tenant took a categoric stand and stated that he only knew to append his signatures in English and that he was unable to write in Hindi or English.
It is not disputed that the tenant had given a specimen of his signatures in English to the Court, which according to the handwriting expert, was not sufficient for the comparison. That being so, the issue which during the course of proceedings, the Rent Controller will have to examine, is as to whether the tenant can write in Hindi or English language or not. For this, essentially a foundation has to be laid by the
2
Civil Revision No.1786 of 2010
landlord. Thus, no ground is made out to interfere with the discretion validly exercised by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh.
Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed.
[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE
August 20, 2010 rps
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the decision of the Rent Controller in declining the petitioner's application was perverse.
Pinki Rani alias Danial Kumar
Anil Mahajan
Kanwalsingh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
