Two revision petitions challenging an eviction order were disposed of as infructuous because the parties entered into fresh tenancy agreements before hearing, rendering the original proceedings null and void.
Revision petitions disposed of as infructuous; pending applications for impleadment also disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
210
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: February 10, 2023 1. CR-2759-2015 (O&M)
Lakhwinder Singh alias Laddi and others
….Petitioners
versus
Ranjit Kaur
….Respondent
2. CR-3906-2015 (O&M)
Vicky @ Pritpal Singh
….Petitioner
versus
Ranjit Kaur
….Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Present: - Mr. Sahil Soi, Advocate for Mr. S.P. Soi, Advocate for petitioner(s)in CR-2759-2015.
Mr. Chetan Chopra, Advocate for
Mr. Vishal Munjal, Advocate for petitioner in CR-3906-2015.
Mr. Aman Dhir, Advocate for the respondent(s) in both the revision petitions.
ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)
Vide this common order and judgment, above-mentioned two
revision petitions are being disposed of, since the issues and facts raised therein are common. For brevity, recitals are taken from CR-2759-2015.
Revision petition is against impugned order dated 18.03.2015
passed by learned Rent Controller, Nakodar, whereby petitioner/ tenant(s) have been ordered to vacate and handover the possession of
MAHAVIR SINGH 2023.02.13 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment
demised shop in question to respondent-landlord(s) in proceedings under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949.
At the outset, learned counsels appearing on behalf of petitioners in both the revision petitions state that they are under instructions not to press the petitions since petitioner/tenant(s)and respondent-landlord(s) have entered into fresh agreements. They have tendered the said agreements, in course of hearing, which are taken on record and marked as Annexures ‘A’ and ‘B’ in respective petitions. They further state that in view thereof, both the revision petitions are rendered infructuous.
In the premise, impugned order(s) passed by learned Rent Controller in both the revision petitions are rendered nullity and present proceedings are disposed of as infructuous.
Pending applications, including applications for impleadment of legal representatives of deceased respondent(s) in both the revision petitions, shall also stand disposed of.
A photocopy of the order be placed on the connected case file.
(ARUN MONGA) JUDGE
February 10, 2023 mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
MAHAVIR SINGH 2023.02.13 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lakhwinder Singh alias Laddi and others
Vicky @ Pritpal Singh
Ranjit Kaur
Arun Monga
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
