Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S Libas Garments vs Raminder Kaur & Others on 14 February, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:021284




                                         2024:PHHC:021284
120 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

                                         CR-8586-2016 (O&M)
                                         Date of decision: 14.02.2024

M/s Libas Garments
                                                ....Petitioner

             Versus

Raminder Kaur and others
                                               ..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:-    Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner

             Mr. Rahul Rampal, Advocate for respondent no.1

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

1. The petitioner herein is a tenant, who is sought to be evicted by the landlady from the shop, by filing a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. During the pendency of the trial, the petitioner filed an application for directing the landlady to allow the draftsman appointed by it to visit the property and prepare the site plan. The Rent Controller dismissed the application.

2. The correctness of the aforesaid order has been challenged in this revision petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paperbook.

4. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the total area in possession of the landlady is required to be determined in order to assess her bona fide necessity.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel representing the parties.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 17-02-2024 10:06:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:021284 CR-8586-2016 (O&M) 2 2024:PHHC:021284

6. It is evident that the shop in question is constructed on a small portion of the residential house. The eviction of the petitioner has been sought from the shop. Hence, the area under the residential house of the landlady has no relevance.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground to interfere is made out.

8. Hence, dismissed.

9. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.



14.02.2024                                      (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                                 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :         Yes/No
Whether reportable :                Yes/No




Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:021284 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 17-02-2024 10:06:20 :::