Partly allowed

Varinder Kumar v. Pushpa Devi and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Aug 2010CR/2023/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this revision petition, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana modified an order assessing provisional rent at Rs.750/- per month to Rs.300/- per month, leaving the final determination of the correct rent quantum to the Rent Controller after evidence is adduced.

What did the court decide?

Modifies the impugned order to hold the petitioner liable to pay provisional rent at Rs.300/- per month instead of Rs.750/- per month.

Varinder Kumar Vs Pushpa Devi and Anr. — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

CR No.2023 of 2010 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

Civil Revision No.2023 of 2010

¶4

Date of Decision: 18 - 8 - 2010

¶5

Varinder Kumar ....Petitioner

¶6

¶7

Pushpa Devi and another

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

¶10

¶11

Present: Mr.C.L.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate and Ms.Bhupinder Kaur, Advocate for the respondents.

¶13

¶14

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

¶15

In the present revision petition order dated 8.3.2010, Annexure P1, whereby provisional rent was assessed has been assailed.

¶16

The Rent Controller had determined Rs.750/- p.m. as the provisional rent to be payable by the tenant w.e.f. 1.8.2005 till 28.2.2010 alongwith simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The cost of Rs.700/was also imposed upon the tenant.

¶17

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 26.3.2010 had passed the following order:-

¶18

“Argues, inter alia, that the learned Rent Controller assessed the provisional rent @ Rs.750/- per month which, the

¶19

CR No.2023 of 2010 [2]

¶20

argument proceeds, is falsified by Annexure P-5 which is an affidavit sworn by the respondent-landlord wherein there was an averment that the rent ought to be corrected to be read as Rs.360/- per month instead of Rs.200/- per month. That affidavit came to be filed in the course of the proceedings for the purposes of house tax.

¶21

Notice of motion. 25.05.2010.

¶22

In the meantime, the eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the tenanted premises shall stand stayed subject, of course, to the clearance of the arrears of rent, if any, @ Rs.300/- per month within one month from today and thereafter the rent shall be paid at that rate by the 10^th of each calendar month.”

¶23

Counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner has paid arrears of rent @ Rs.300/- p.m. to comply with order dated 26.3.2010. Except the affidavit which was annexed with the eviction petition, there is no other document with the landlord to show that the rent was Rs.750/- p.m. In the reply filed to the eviction petition, the tenant had stated that the rent was Rs.200/- p.m.

¶24

Counsel for the respondents submit that the respondents had claimed the rent since 2001 and the Rent Controller had committed an error to restrict the same to the period of three years.

¶25

The question as to what was the rent, is left open to be decided by the Rent Controller, after the parties adduce their evidence. The Rent Controller after the evidence led by the parties shall determine the quantum of rent. The Rent Controller shall also examine on the basis of the evidence adduced by the parties as to from which date the rent is due. However, impugned order dated 8.3.2010 is modified and the tenant is held liable to pay the provisional rent @ Rs.300/- p.m. for the period specified in the

¶26

CR No.2023 of 2010 [3]

¶27

impugned order alongwith same interest and cost. Needless to say that in case the Rent Controller later comes to a conclusion that the rent was more than Rs.300/- p.m., the petitioner will be allowed to make good the deficiency in the rent.

¶28

With the aforesaid observations, the revision petition stands

¶29

disposed of.

¶30

( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) August 18, 2010. JUDGE

¶31

Varinder Kumar v. Pushpa Devi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varinder Kumar v. Pushpa Devi and Anr.

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

Jaipal Singh Vs Neeraj Kumar Garg

Suman Bala Vs Sanjay Vohra and Ors.

Ramesh Kumar and Ors. Vs Kamla Rani and Ors.

Rajinder Lal Vs Gopal Krishan

Sohan Singh Vs Arya Pradeshik Pritinidhi Sabha

Inderjit Singh Vs Surinder Kumar Saini