Revision petition challenging the Rent Controller's decision to decline the tenant's prayer for amendment of pleadings. Court dismissed the petition, holding no occasion to permit assessment of fair rent as the controversy was strictly about the rent rate.
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.
CR-809-2012 (O&M)
[ 1 ]
::::::::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR-809-2012 (O&M) Date of decision:08.02.2012
Sham Lal ...Petitioner Versus Asha Rani ...Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the petitioner.
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)
This revision petition is directed against order dated 14.09.2011 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Rajpura by which a prayer made by the tenant for filing counter-claim under Order 9 Rule 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [for short “CPC”] by way of amendment of the reply under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC or by way of subsequent pleadings under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC, has been declined.
In short, the landlady has filed the petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [for short “the Act”] for eviction of the tenant on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent w.e.f. 06.03.2002 @ 6,945/- per month. In reply, the rate of rent has been denied and it has been alleged that the monthly rent was @ 3,000/- and the rent note dated 07.10.1998 was forged and fabricated. It has been observed by the learned Rent Controller that it is admitted by the tenant in his reply that the landlady had obtained his signatures on some blank papers and stamp papers and her father-in-law used to receive the rent as per instructions of the landlady and further used to issue receipts.
As a matter of fact, the tenant had admitted his signatures
[ 2 ]
CR-809-2012 (O&M)
::::::::
upon the rent deed Ex.A1 in which the rent has been mentioned @ `6,000/- per month, whereas the controversy between the parties is only with regard to the rate of rent and thus, question of determination of fair rent does not arise at all. The leaned Rent Controller has also observed that in these circumstances, the questino of determination of fair rent does not arise at all.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the record and I am of the view that there is no occasion for permitting the tenant to seek the amendment for assessment of fair rent as per Section 4 of the Act. Finding no merit in the revision petition, the same is hereby dismissed.
(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE
February 08, 2012 vinod*
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the tenant was entitled to seek amendment for assessment of fair rent
Whether the Rent Controller was correct in declining the prayer for amendment of pleadings under Order 9 Rule 9A CPC
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Sham Lal
Asha Rani
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
