Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vikram vs Prem Dass on 3 April, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044664
CR-8436 of 2018 (O&M) -1- 2024:PHHC:044664
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR-8436 of 2018 (O&M)
Date of Order:03.04.2024
Vikram
.Petitioner
Versus
Prem Dass ..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. S.K.S.Bedi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Anita Sharma, Advocate
for the respondent.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J
1. The petitioner here is a tenant, who has been ordered to be
evicted concurrently by the Rent Controller as well as by the Appellate
Authority.
2. This Bench has heard the learned counsel representing the
parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper book.
3. The learned counsel representing the petitioner has made two
following submissions:-
(i) As per order dated 27.03.2019, the respondent-landlord
has given up his right to seek eviction on the ground of
bonafide necessity.
(ii) During the pendency of the eviction petition, the landlord
has been successful in getting possession of six shops as
per the orders of the Court.
4. This court has considered the submissions of the learned
counsel representing the parties.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044664
CR-8436 of 2018 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:044664
5. The learned counsel representing the petitioner relies upon
paragraph 3 of the order dated 27.03.2019, which reads as under:-
3. The strange aspect of the matter however, is that when
the Revision came up first of all before this Court on
14.12.2018, the Respondent/Landlord was already on
Caveat, and his Ld. Counsel made verbal submission to
the effect that the Petitioner was liable to be summarily
evicted from the demised Shop-Room on account of non-
payment of rent strictly in accordance with the earlier
order passed by this Court in CR No.7215 of 2015 on
3.11.2015. In fine, the submission of the Respondent's
counsel was that the aspect of bonafide/reasonable
requirement of the Respondent/Landlord, against which
the Petitioner/Tenant had also filed the Revision, was not
at all required to be looked into, since the Petitioner in
any event was liable to be evicted due to non-payment of
rent/noncompliance of the concerned order passed in CR
No.7215 of 2015. Interestingly, the submission made on
behalf of the Respondent in this regard was totally verbal
on account of which, this Court was constrained to direct
the Respondent's counsel on 4.2.2019 to at least place on
record her written notes of arguments on this particular
submission, and also called for case record of CR
No.7215 of 2015, which had already been disposed off in
the meantime."
6. The learned counsel representing the respondent-landlord at that
stage pressed for dismissal of the revision petition as the tenant did not pay
the rent. However, the eviction of the petitioner has been ordered by both
the courts below on twin grounds, namely, bonafide necessity of the
landlord as well as non-payment. There was no statement by the landlord to
give up the ground of bonafide necessity.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044664
CR-8436 of 2018 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:044664
7. With regard to second submission, it may be noted that the
Appellate Authority has taken note of this development. It has been noticed
that the landlord has two sons, who are grown up and unemployed. The
Appellate Authority examined the issue and found that the landlord wishes
to demolish all these shops and construct two big showrooms in order to
settle his children. There is no force in the second submission of the learned
counsel representing the petitioner.
8. The scope of interference in a revision petition against the
orders passed by the authorities under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent
& Eviction) Act, 1973 is limited in view of the five Judge Bench judgment
passed by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs.
Dilbahar Singh(2014) 9 SCC 78.
9. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and discussion, no ground
to interfere is made out.
10. Dismissed.
11. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed
of.
April 03, 2024 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :YES/NO
Whether reportable :YES/NO
3 of 3
