High CourtsSingle Bench

Suraj Parkash vs Jasvir Singh Jawanda and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 18 September 2012 · Citation: (2012) 09 P&H CK 0008

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jaswant Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 — Section 15(5)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Revision No. 1618 of 2012 (O and M)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 305 words

Jaswant Singh, J.—Petitioner(tenant) is in revision u/s 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 against the judgment of reversal dated 12.01.2012 passed by learned Appellate Authority, Chandigarh whereby the order dated 13.01.2009 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh was set aside and petitioner(tenant) was directed to handover vacant possession of the demised premises i.e. top/IInd floor of SCF No. 3, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. After arguing for sometime, realising that the court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned judgment passed by learned Appellate Authority, learned Counsel for the petitioner(tenant) on instructions from petitioner(tenant)-Suraj Parkash, who is present in the court, submits that he would not press this revision petition provided some reasonable time is granted to make alternative arrangement to shift his inventory from the demised premises.

2.

Learned Counsel for the respondents(landlords) does not object to the grant of any reasonable time.

3.

In view of the agreed stand, this petition is dismissed as not pressed, however, seven months time commencing w.e.f. 01.09.2012 is granted to the petitioner-tenant for making alternative arrangement subject to his furnishing an undertaking on or before 15.10.2012 before the Court of learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh, that he shall hand over actual physical vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent landlord by 31.03.2013. The undertaking shall also state that the entire arrears of rent, if any, at the already determined rate shall be cleared and that he shall continue to pay the rent in advance by 10th of each calendar month. Statement of petitioner(tenant) in this regard has been recorded separately today in the court. Needless to say that any violation of the terms shall entitle the landlord to seek his eviction forthwith with police help, if necessary without recourse to any other remedy besides the petitioner-tenant making himself liable in contempt proceeding.