Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sh. Parkash Chand Verma vs Sh. Bhupnesh Chand Kaistha & Ors on 21 March, 2018

Author: Dharam Chand Chaudhary

Bench: Dharam Chand Chaudhary

                                                      1



                HO'BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
                                 SHIMLA

                                                       Civil Revision No.143 of 2017




                                                                                         .
                                                      Decided on: March 21, 2018





             Sh. Parkash Chand Verma                                              ..........Petitioner

                                                       Versus





             Sh. Bhupnesh Chand Kaistha & Ors.                                   ........Respondents

             Coram:




             The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner r : Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, Advocate.

For respondent No.1 : Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Neeraj Gupta and Ms. Rinki Kashmiri, Advocates.

Respondents No.2 to 4 exparte.

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (Oral).

Respondents No.2 to 4 are duly served, however, failed to put in appearance, hence, proceeded against exparte.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

2. Heard. If not painful it is shocking to note that the petitioner-tenant having been ordered to be evicted from the demised premises long-back in the year 2004 and the order .

of ejectment attained finality on dismissal of the appeal by learned appellate Court on 16.05.2009, has sought the transfer of pending execution proceedings from the Court of learned Rent Controller-I, Kangra, to another Court, i.e. learned Rent Controller-II, Kangra, on the ground that an official working in the Court of learned Rent Controller, Kangra, has threatened him to vacate the demised premises, failing which he shall be evicted there-from forcibly. Since he has already been ordered to be evicted from the demised premises, therefore, now only execution part remains and for that it can not be believed by any stretch of imagination that the so called official has threatened him in the manner, as aforesaid.

3. Above all, no useful purpose would serve by seeking transfer of the execution petition from the Court of learned Rent Controller-I, Kangra, to that of learned Rent ::: Downloaded on - 20/05/2018 21:14:15 :::HCHP 3 Controller-II, Kangra, because the so called official who has threatened him is posted in that very Court Complex. In my considered opinion, the application for transfer of the .

execution proceedings, has been filed with an ulterior motive to delay the same. In this view of the matter not only the petition deserves dismissal but with exemplary costs, so that such frivolous litigation is not brought to the Court. The petition, as such, is dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/-. The petitioner-judgment-debtor is directed to pay the same to respondent No.1-landlord on the next date of hearing before learned Rent Controller. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

An authenticated copy of this judgment be sent to learned Rent Controller, for compliance.

                               (Dharam Chand Chaudhary)
    March 21, 2018                      Judge
     (Yashwant)




                                        ::: Downloaded on - 20/05/2018 21:14:15 :::HCHP