Dismissed

Kulwant Kaur v. Gian Singh Mann and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jul 2013CR/4737/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Field Judge dismissed a writ petition filed by a purchaser of property seeking impleadment in eviction proceedings. The court held that the petition was an abuse of process given a prior rejection of similar application and a dismissed suit for injunction on the same facts.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's petition dismissed with costs of Rs. 5,000 to be deposited with the Legal Services Authority.

Kulwant Kaur Vs Gian Singh Mann and Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CR No.4737 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.07.2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Kulwant Kaur

¶4

......Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

Dr. Gian Singh Mann & ors.

¶7

......Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

¶9

¶10

Present: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.K Kalsy, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶11

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral)

¶12

The petitioner, who moved an application for being impleaded as respondent under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC in the eviction petition filed by respondent No.1 seeking ejectment of respondent No.2, has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 9.6.2012 of the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, vide which her aforesaid application for impleadment has been dismissed on the ground that in the proceedings under the Rent Act, question of title cannot be decided.

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that since the petitioner has purchased the property vide registered sale deed dated 17.4.1989, she has a right to be impleaded in the eviction proceedings since respondent No.1 is not the owner of the premises in dispute.

¶14

However, counsel for respondent No.1 has produced before this Court the order dated 3.10.2012 passed in CR No.5856 of 2012 titled as “Kulwant Kaur vs. Rehumdin & ors., wherein similar application filed by the petitioner on the basis of the same sale deed dated 17.4.1989 was rejected.

¶15

Not only this, learned counsel representing respondent No.1

¶16

Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.25 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CR No.4737 of 2012 (O&M)

¶18

-2-

¶19

has also produced before this Court a judgment dated 21.5.2013 passed by Sh. Lavdeep Hundal, PCS, Civil Judge Junior Division, Ludhiana in Civil Suit No.78 of 16.5.2009 whereby suit filed by petitioner-Kulwant Kaur against the Gian Singh Mann (respondent No.1 in this petition) for permanent injunction restraining him from recovering the rent from the tenants (which includes respondents No.2 also), has been dismissed.

¶20

In view thereof, the continuation of the present petition is nothing but an abuse of process of law at the hands of the petitioner.

¶21

The present petition is dismissed with costs which are assessed at Rs.5,000/-.

¶22

Costs be deposited with the Punjab State Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh.

¶23

July 23, 2013 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE

¶24

Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.25 11:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Kulwant Kaur v. Gian Singh Mann and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulwant Kaur v. Gian Singh Mann and Ors.

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

M/S Rajesh Vij & Co. Vs Partap Singh

Pardeep Kumar Vs Manjit Kaur & Ors.

Kuldip Singh Tamber Vs Gurjit Singh and Ors.

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.