Raj Kumar Jain v. Parkash Goyal
Case brief
What is this about?
This order dismisses a landlord's revision petition against the Rent Controller's order refusing an appointment of a Local Commissioner/Valuer to assess market rent. The Court held that during eviction proceedings, provisional rent is based on the admitted rate, and the landlord's remedy to seek a rent increase lies elsewhere.
What did the court decide?
Revision petition dismissed against the Rent Controller's order dismissing the application for appointment of a Valuer.
What the court decided
1
CR 5292/2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR 5292/2013 Date of decision:02/09/2013
Raj Kumar Jain
.............Petitioner
v.
Parkash Goyal
.............Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:Mr.Parminder Singh,Advocate for the petitioner.
Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)
The landlord is in revision aggrieved against the order dated 8.4.2013(P2) passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh whereby his application for appointment of a Local Commissioner/ Valuer to assess the market rent at the stage of assessment of provisional rent has been dismissed.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the Rent Controller's order dismissing the landlord's application for appointment of a Valuer to assess market rent at the stage of provisional rent determina
Whether the assessment of arrears of provisional rent is based on the admitted rate of rent rather than a higher market rate in eviction proceedings.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Raj Kumar Jain
- respondent
Parkash Goyal
Coram
Jaswant Singh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · September
- Registered
- Case no.
- CR/5292/2013
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court