Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 1528 P&H
Judgement Date : 23 January, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:009106
2024:PHHC:009106
123 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR-1761-2020(O&M)
Date of decision :23.01.2024
Vinod Kumar ...Petitioner
Vs.
Parveen Chawla ...Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Gaurav Aggarwal, Advocate
for the respondent.
***
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
1. The tenant challenges the correctness of concurrent orders passed by
the Courts below. While ordering his eviction on the ground of bona fide
necessity of the landlord, it has come on record that the landlord requires the
premises/shop to run his livelihood and the landlord's sister who is also a
co-owner of the tenanted premises wants the premises for settling her unemployed
son.
2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner though made a sincere
attempt, however, failed to draw the attention of the Court to any material error or
perversity in the concurrent orders passed by the Courts below. The scope of
interference in rent revision is extremely limited in view of the Five Judge Bench
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
Limited V. Dilbahar Singh' (2014) 9 SCC 78.
3. In view of the aforesaid facts, no ground for interference is made out.
4. Hence, dismissed accordingly.
(ANIL KSHETARPAL)
23.01.2024 JUDGE
neeraj Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No
Whether Reportable : Yes No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:009106
1 of 1
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!