Disposed

Agrim and Ors. v. Satish Kumar Thareja

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jul 2013CR/6608/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a landlord-tenant eviction dispute, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed the Rent Controller to adjudicate on the assessed rate of rent and arrears, holding that the magistrate must consider the shortness of provisional rent before passing a final order. The tenant was given nine months to complete the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Rent Controller to dispose of the rent petition within nine months, adjudicating on the rate of rent and arrears to pass a final order.

Agrim and Ors. Vs Satish Kumar Thareja — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CR No.6608 of 2012 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CR No.6608 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.07.2013

¶5

Agrim & ors.

¶6

......Petitioner(s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

Satish Kumar Thareja ......Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

¶10

¶11

Present: Mr. C.B. Goel, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Arun Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Chetan Salathia, Advocate for the respondent.

¶13

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral)

¶14

CM No.13817-CII of 2013

¶15

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Document is taken on record.

¶16

CR No.6608 of 2012

¶17

The landlord-petitioners filed an application for eviction of the respondent on various grounds including the ground of non-payment of rent claiming that he is liable to pay rent @ Rs.52,000/- per month exclusive of house tax and is in arrears of rent w.e.f. 1.3.2011 to 30.4.2012 and the total arrears of rent comes to Rs.7,28,000/-.

¶18

Though the written statement was not filed yet the tenantrespondent contested the claim of the landlord-petitioners by producing documents on record to contend that the rate of rent was fixed at Rs.18,000/- per month and the tenant-respondent was in arrears only for a period of 12 months i.e. from 1.5.2011 to 30.4.2012.

¶19

Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.19 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶20

CR No.6608 of 2012 (O&M)

¶21

¶22

The Rent Controller, Jagadhri vide impugned order, assessed the provisional rent at Rs.18,000/- per month and payable for 12 months w.e.f 1.5.2011 to 30.4.2012.

¶23

The aforesaid order is under challenge before this Court by the landlord-petitioners. Though various grounds have been raised to challenge the aforesaid provisionally assessed rent, however, it is an admitted position that the aforesaid provisional rent as assessed by the Rent Controller, Jagadhri has been deposited by the tenant and the same has also been withdrawn by the landlord-petitioners without prejudice to their rights.

¶24

It is further not in dispute that after passing of this order, the respondent has also filed written statement wherein, he has taken the same defence with regard to rate of rent and arrears of rent as taken at the time of assessment of provisional rent. Even the issues have been framed and the case is at the evidence stage. This Court has also been informed that the Rent Controller has framed the following issues for consideration:

¶25

“1. Whether respondents are liable to be evicted from the demised premises as fully detailed and described in the head note of the petition on the grounds as alleged? OPP

¶26

2. Whether the petition is not maintainable?

¶27

OPR

¶28

3. Relief.”

¶29

It could not be disputed by the tenant-respondent that issue No.1 also includes the issue with regard to non-payment of rent. Once that is so, the Rent Controller is obliged to give findings with regard to rate of rent payable and the arrears as per the pleadings and evidence of the

¶30

Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.19 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶31

¶32

CR No.6608 of 2012 (O&M)

¶33

parties. In case the provisional rent as assessed vide impugned order is found short then obviously while passing the final order, the Rent Controller is under legal obligation to take into account the said fact and pass order in accordance with law.

¶34

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the Rent Controller is directed to dispose of the rent petition as expeditiously as possible but not later than nine months from today.

¶35

Disposed of.

¶36

July 09, 2013 ps

¶37

(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE

¶38

Saini Pushpinder 2013.07.19 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Agrim and Ors. v. Satish Kumar Thareja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Agrim and Ors. v. Satish Kumar Thareja

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 Rai Karan Suraj Bhan Vs Balbir Singh and Anr.

Chaman Lal Vs Bal Krishan Bindal

Gursewak Singh Vs Ved Parkash

Bimal Kumar Vs Indu Jain & Ors.

M/S Bajrang Lal Amit Kumar and Anr. Vs Ram Niwas and Ors.

Pushpa Rani Vs Bal Kishan and Anr.