Dismissed

Surjit Kaur v. Lovely Ice Creams

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Jul 2013CR/2760/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's appeal against the impleadment of Legal Heirs of Narinder Singh. It held that bringing heirs on record for the specific rent application does not resolve inter se rights with other potential heirs of the original tenant, Agya Kaur.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed without adjudication on merits as the objection was misconceived.

Surjit Kaur Vs Lovely Ice Creams — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶2

CR No.2760 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.7.2013

Smt. Surjit Kaur

-----Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Lovely Ice Creams

¶7

-----Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

¶9

Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

¶10

To be referred to reporters or not?

¶11

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶12

Present:Mr. Chandandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.

¶14

Petitioner filed an eviction application against the respondent-Lovely Ice Creams through Shri Narinder Singh, alleging that the demised premises were taken on rent by one Ms. Agya Kaur wife of Amar Singh vide rent deed dated 10.5.1977 and she had started her business in the name of M/s Public Store and Sweet Shop. After her death, her son Narinder Singh was continuing in the business in the rented accommodation, who has changed the nature of business as Lovely Ice Creams.

¶15

It is a matter of fact that the said Narinder Singh expired on 11.12.2012. Thereafter, his heirs namely Kulwinder

¶16

Kumar Ashwani 2013.07.26 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CR No. 2760 of 2013

¶18

¶19

Kaur (widow), Charanpreet Kaur and Ramanjot Singh moved an application to implead them as respondents. Petitioner contested the aforesaid application on the ground that she has never accepted the aforesaid Narinder Singh as tenant. Moreover, Agya Kaur had other legal heirs and Narinder Singh was just carrying on the business on their behalf, who have not been impleaded. The Rent Controller vide impugned order dated 8.2.2013 allowed the application filed by the respondents and impleaded them as LRs of Narinder Singh for the purpose of the rent application.

¶20

The aforesaid order has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground that all the legal heirs of Agya Kaur who was the original tenant in the shop in dispute, have not been impleaded.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order.

¶22

The argument raised is misconceived. Admittedly, Narinder Singh was the son of Agya Kaur, the alleged tenant in the demises premises. It is well settled that it is the duty of LRs of a deceased to bring themselves on the record. The applicants who have been arrayed as respondents in this petition have come on record to pursue the present petition. Moreover, vide impugned order, the application for impleadment of LRs of Narinder Singh has been allowed for the purpose of the said rent

¶23

Kumar Ashwani 2013.07.26 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶24

CR No. 2760 of 2013

¶25

¶26

application only and it does not in any way mean to decide the inter se rights of the LRs of Narinder Singh vis-à-vis any other LRs of Agya Kaur and the LRs have been ordered to be brought on record only to represent Narinder Singh, against whom the petitioner herself has filed the instant petition.

¶27

No merits.

¶28

Dismissed.

¶29

July 24, 2013 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ak JUDGE

¶30

Kumar Ashwani 2013.07.26 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Surjit Kaur v. Lovely Ice Creams

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surjit Kaur v. Lovely Ice Creams

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

Inderjit Kaur and Others Vs Varinder Kumar and Others

M/S Faquir Chand Karwa and Sons and Anr. Vs Vinod Kapoor and Ors.

Kulwant Kaur Vs Gian Singh Mann and Ors.

Jai Pal Vs Sita Rani

Syndicate Bank Vs Devindra Singh etc.

Amar Nath Vs Maluka etc.