Dismissed

M/S Rai Karan Suraj Bhan v. Balbir Singh and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Jul 2013CR/3985/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tenants revision petition dismissed on merits accepting findings that landlords require premises for bona fide personal necessity. Petitioner granted time until 31.12.2013 to hand over vacant possession

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted six months time to hand over vacant possession on or before 31.12.2013 subject to payment of rent and furnishing undertaking to Rent Controller.

M/S Rai Karan Suraj Bhan Vs Balbir Singh and Anr. — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CR No.3985 of 2013 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CR No.3985 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.07.2013

¶5

M/s Rai Karan Suraj Bhan, Commission Agents

¶6

-----Petitioner(s)

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Balbir Singh & another

¶9

-----Respondent(s)

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

To be referred to reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

Present:Mr. Amit Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶15

Mr. Saurav Khanna, Advocate for the respondents-caveator. ---

¶16

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.

¶17

This is tenant’s revision petition, challenging the order dated 22.08.2012 of the Rent Controller, Kurukshetra, whereby his eviction has been ordered from the demised premises on the ground of bona fide need of the respondents-landlords and the judgment dated 29.4.2013 of the Appellate Authority, Kurukshetra, dismissing his appeal against the order of eviction passed by the Rent Controller.

¶18

CR No.3985 of 2013 (O&M)

¶19

¶20

The Courts below, on appreciation of the evidence on record, have recorded a concurrent finding that the respondentslandlords require the demised premises for their bona fide personal necessity.

¶21

Even before this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has remained unsuccessful to challenge the aforesaid findings by pointing out any material irregularities.

¶22

Faced with the aforesaid situation, counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the demises premises is a shop, wherein the petitioner is running his business and the petitioner is ready to hand over the vacant possession of the same to the respondents-landlords if sufficient time is given to him.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the petitioner shall pay usual monthly rent upto the date of handing over of the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondents-landlords as charges for the use and occupation of the same. Learned counsel has further stated that the petitioner shall hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondents-landlord on or before the expiry of the time granted by this Court. He further stated that the petitioner shall file an undertaking before the Rent Controller in this regard.

¶24

Thus, keeping in view the submissions made, the revision petition is dismissed, on merits. However, the petitioner is granted time upto 31.12.2013 from today to hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondents-landlords, subject to

¶25

CR No.3985 of 2013 (O&M)

¶26

¶27

payment of rent etc., as stated above and also furnishing of an undertaking of the petitioner before the Rent Controller within one month from today to hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises on or before the expiry of the stipulated period of six months upto 31.12.2013.

¶28

It is made clear that the petitioner shall be bound by the submissions made on his behalf by his counsel before this Court.

¶29

In case of non-compliance of the order passed by this Court, the petitioner shall also be liable for initiation of contempt proceedings for contempt of this Court in addition to the execution of the eviction order.

¶30

July 08, 2013 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) savita JUDGE

M/S Rai Karan Suraj Bhan v. Balbir Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Rai Karan Suraj Bhan v. Balbir Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Up State Handloom Corp & Anr. Vs Manohar Singh & Ors.

Ramesh Kumar Vs Dina Nath

Ram Lal & Sons Vs Bhushan Kumar Jain & Anr.

Chaman Lal Vs Bal Krishan Bindal

Gursewak Singh Vs Ved Parkash

Mehar Singh and Anr. Vs Kesar Singh