The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a revision petition challenging mesne profit orders. The court found the petitioner failed to comply with comply with payment directions and the landlord executed eviction after possession was taken on 5.7.2013.
Petitioner to pay Rs.20,000 to High Court Legal Services Authority within one month.
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
CR No.3279 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.07.2013
Amarjit Singh
......Petitioner(s)
Versus
Smt. Angrej Kaur & ors.
......Respondent(s)
CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the respondents.
Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral)
Eviction of the petitioner was ordered from the demised premises vide order dated 17.1.2012 on the ground of personal necessity of the respondent-landlord.
Feeling aggrieved from the aforesaid order of the Rent Controller, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority. During the pendency of the said appeal, the Appellate Authority vide impugned order dated 2.4.2012 determined the mesne profits for the demised premises at Rs.5,000/- per month with effect from the date of order of eviction. The said order has been challenged by the tenantpetitioner by filing the instant revision petition.
On 28.5.2012 after noticing the contentions of the counsel for the petitioner, this Court had passed the following order :
“Notice of motion for 18.9.2012.
In the meantime, operation of the impugned order stands stayed subject to deposit of 50% of
Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.29 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
the arrears of mesne profits within one month from
today.”
Thereafter, this revision petition remained pending in this
Court.
On 22.7.2013, this Court passed the following order:
“It is stated that counsel for the petitioner is
in personal difficulty.
List on 26.7.2013.
To be shown in the urgent list.
In the meantime, counsel for the petitioner may place on record the receipt showing compliance of the order dated 28.5.2012.
It is further made clear that in case the said order has not been complied with, the respondentlandlord is at liberty to execute the order in question and the aforesaid order will not come in his way.”
No one is present on behalf of the petitioner to assist the
Court.
However, learned counsel for the respondent has brought to the notice of this Court that the order dated 28.5.2012 has not been complied with as the petitioner has failed to deposit the arrears as directed by this Court vide the aforesaid order. He has further brought to the notice of this Court that even possession of the demised premises has been taken by the respondent-landlord on 5.7.2013 in execution of the eviction order.
In view thereof, this Court finds no merit in this petition. Since the petitioner had taken benefit of remaining in possession even after
Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.29 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
passing of the eviction order by virtue of the interim order of this Court and has failed to comply with the same and further has not brought to the notice of this Court the fact that possession of the demised premises was taken over by the landlord in execution of the eviction order on 5.7.2013, this is a fit case where costs of Rs.20,000/- should be imposed upon the petitioner.
Ordered accordingly.
This petition is dismissed with costs which are assessed at
Rs.20,000/-.
Let the aforesaid amount of Rs.20,000/- be paid by the petitioner with the High Court Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh within one month from today.
July 26, 2013 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE
Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.29 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the revision petition lacks merit given the petitioner's failure to comply with court orders and the landlord's execution of eviction.
Amarjit Singh
Smt. Angrej Kaur & ors.
Rakesh Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
