Partly allowed

Ajit Kumar Jain v. Suresh Jain

Punjab & Haryana HC29 May 2012CR/2385/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil revision petition in a landlord-tenant dispute was allowed as withdrawn with liberty. The tenant-petitioner was granted nine months to vacate the shop and was directed to deposit arrears within two months and pay advance rent by the 15th of each month thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed time to vacate the demised shop (九 months) and pay arrears within two months by affidavit before Rent Controller.

Ajit Kumar Jain Vs Suresh Jain — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CIVIL REVISION NO.2385 OF 2012 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 29th MAY 2012

Ajit Kumar Jain

…. Petitioner

Versus

Suresh Jain

…. Respondent

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL

¶9

¶10

Present : Mr. Sandeep Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

L. N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

¶13

CM No.13595-CII of 2012

¶14

Allowed as prayed for.

¶15

CM No.13596-CII of 2012

¶16

The application is allowed and Annexure P-3 is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

¶17

CM No.13600-CII of 2012

¶18

This is application for preponing the hearing of the revision petition. Although no ground is made out, yet the prayer is allowed. Revision petition is preponed for hearing for today itself as prayed for by counsel for the petitioner.

¶19

The application stands allowed accordingly.

¶20

CM No.10155-CII of 2012

¶21

The application is allowed and Annexures P-1 and P-2 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

¶22

CM No.10156-CII of 2012

¶23

CR NO.2385 OF 2012 (O&M)

¶24

¶25

Allowed as prayed for.

¶26

CIVIL REVISION NO.2385 OF 2012

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at length and after seeking instructions from son of the petitioner Tarun Jain who is stated to be present in person in the Court, seeks permission to withdraw the instant revision petition with prayer that petitioner be granted reasonable time to vacate the demised shop.

¶28

Dismissed as withdrawn.

¶29

Tenant-petitioner is granted nine months’ time to vacate the demised shop and to handover peaceful vacant actual possession of the demised shop to respondent-landlady, subject to the conditions that the petitioner-tenant shall within two months from today pay/deposit all arrears of rent/mesne profits, if any, and shall thereafter continue to pay/deposit the same in advance by 15^th of every month and shall on or before 15.06.2012 file undertaking to this effect by way of affidavit before the concerned Rent Controller.

¶30

29^th May, 2012 ‘raj’

¶31

(L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE

Ajit Kumar Jain v. Suresh Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Kumar Jain v. Suresh Jain

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

Harjit Kaur Vs Punjab State Electricity Board and Anr.

Parveen Nayyar Vs Vikram Dhanda

Jaspal Kaur and Ors. Vs Amarjit Singh and Anr.

Sardul Singh Vs Bagicha Ram

Neeru Gambhir Vs Gurdeep Kaur

Clarion Properties Ltd. Vs Legands Home Residential Welfare Association and Anrs