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 0, Cited by 4]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Pawan Kumar vs Narinder Pal on 18 January, 2016

            116 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                             AT CHANDIGARH

                                                    CM-915-CII-2016 in/and
                                                    Civil Revision No. 6646 of 2015
                                                    Date of decision : 18.01.2016

            Pawan Kumar                                         ....... Petitioner

                                  versus

            Narinder PaL                                    ....... Respondent

            CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
                                     ***
            Present: Mr.Anil Chawla , Advocate for the petitioner.

                                  Mr.Akhlilesh Vyas, Advocate for the
                                  caveator-respondent.

                                                    ***
            1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
            2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
            3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

            AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)

CM-915-CII-2016 This is an application for preponement. For the reasons recorded, the application is allowed and the case is preponed to today. With the consent of learned counsel, the case is taken up for arguments. Civil Revision No. 6646 of 2015 After arguing for some time learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he would not press this petition on merits and the petitioner undertakes to vacate the premises without the landlord having to file an execution petition. Learned counsel for the respondent has also fairly stated that in this view of the matter he would abide by any decision given by this Court which has been accepted by learned counsel for the petitioner also.

In the circumstances it is directed that in case the petitioner undertakes to vacate the premises on or before 30.09.2016 the landlord shall not execute the order. The petitioner, of course, would be liable SUNITA NAGPAL 2016.01.22 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity y of this document Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 6646 of 2015 -2- to pay the rent and other charges in advance by the 7th of every month failing which the extension given by this Court would cease. It is also made clear that in case the necessary undertaking is not filed before this Court by the petitioner in this case within 15 days, the petition would be deemed to have been dismissed.

(AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE January 18 , 2016 sunita SUNITA NAGPAL 2016.01.22 12:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity y of this document Chandigarh