Partly allowed

Yogeet & Ors. v. Harpreet Singh Sodhi

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Aug 2013CR/4116/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a revision petition in an eviction matter despite earlier findings of the Appellate Authority. The Court issued nine months to the petitioners to hand over vacant possession if they agree to pay outstanding rents and file an undertaking, subject to the respondent's consent.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed on merits but time granted of nine months to hand over vacant possession to the landlord subject to rent payment and undertaking.

Yogeet & Ors. Vs Harpreet Singh Sodhi — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

¶2

AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

CR No.4116 of 2013(O&M) Date of decision: 23.08.2013

Yogeet & others

-----Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Harpreet Singh Sodhi

¶8

-----Respondent(s)

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

To be referred to reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

Present:Mr. B.R. Gupta, Advocate

¶14

for the petitioners alongwith petitioner No.1.

¶15

Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate

¶16

for the respondent alongwith respondent.

¶17

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.

¶18

CM No.14708-CII of 2013:

¶19

The application is allowed subject to all just

¶20

exceptions. Name of Ankur is deleted from the array of parties,

¶21

as he is stated to have died on 27.9.2012

¶22

CR No.4116 of 2013(O&M):

¶23

This is tenants’ revision petition challenging the order

¶24

dated 14.5.2013 of the first Appellate Authority, whereby his

¶25

Kumar Ashwani 2013.08.29 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶26

CR No. 4116 of 2013

¶27

¶28

eviction has been ordered from the demised premises on the ground of non-payment of rent and personal bona fide need of the respondent-landlord.

¶29

The respondent-landlord had filed an eviction petition against tenant-Bal Krishan, alleging that petitioner-tenants were liable to be ejected from the demised premises on the ground of non-payment of rent and bona fide personal necessity of the respondent-landlord.

¶30

Upon notice, the petitioners filed their reply raising various preliminary objections. On merits, relationship of landlord and tenants was disputed. The other averments were denied and dismissal of the petition was prayed.

¶31

The Rent Controller partly allowed the eviction petition, granting two months time to the petitioners-in-interest to pay all the arrears of rent w.e.f. 21.12.1998, however, eviction of the petitioner-tenants on the ground of personal necessity was declined.

¶32

Appeal filed by the respondent-landlord against the aforesaid order of the Rent Controller was allowed by the Appellate Authority and the petitioners were ordered to be ejected from the demised premises.

¶33

Still not satisfied, the petitioner-tenants have filed the instant petition, challenging the order of eviction of passed by the Appellate Authority.

¶34

Kumar Ashwani 2013.08.29 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶35

CR No. 4116 of 2013

¶36

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioners has remained unsuccessful to challenge the aforesaid findings of the Appellate Authority and could not point out any material irregularities.

¶38

Faced with the aforesaid situation, counsel for the petitioners, on instructions from petitioner No.1-Yogeet, who is present in Court, has submitted that the demises premises is a booth, wherein the petitioners are running their business and thus, petitioners are ready to hand over the vacant possession of the same to the respondent-landlord if sufficient time is given to them.

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioners has further stated that the petitioners shall pay usual monthly rent upto the date of handing over of the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent-landlord as charges for the use and occupation of the same. Learned counsel has further stated that the petitioners shall hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent-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.

¶40

Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord, on instructions from the respondent-Harpreet Singh Sodhi, who is present in Court, states that the respondent has no objection to the aforesaid arrangement.

¶41

Kumar Ashwani 2013.08.29 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶42

CR No. 4116 of 2013

¶43

¶44

Thus, keeping in view the submissions made, the revision petition is dismissed, on merits. However, the petitioners are granted nine months’ time from today i.e. upto 22.5.2014 to hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent-landlord, subject to payment of rent etc., as stated above and also furnishing of an undertaking of the petitioners 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 nine months upto 22.5.2013.

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

August 23, 2013 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ak JUDGE

¶48

Kumar Ashwani 2013.08.29 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Yogeet & Ors. v. Harpreet Singh Sodhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogeet & Ors. v. Harpreet Singh Sodhi

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

Parkash @ Parkash Chand & Ors. Vs Paramjit Singh & Ors.

Raghbir Singh Vs Mukhtiar Kaur

State of Haryana Thru Collector, Rewari Ors. Vs Hari Ram Yadav

Malkiat Singh Vs Isher Dass and Ors.

Lakhvir Kaur Vs Charan Kaur and Ors.

Krishna Devi Vs Kulwinder Kaur and Ors.