Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.24 seconds)Section 18A in East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949
Baldev Singh Bajwa vs Monish Saini on 5 October, 2005
13. In the present case, landlord has been able to prove that he is a non-resident Indian that he has returned to India and he required his accommodation for running his own business and further he was owner of the property for the last five years before the institution of the present proceedings. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Rent Controller being in consonance with the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Baldev Singh Bajwa case (supra), does not call for any interference in this revision petition.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Narinder Singh vs Kirpa Singh And Ors. on 21 July, 2006
11. However, on consideration of the matter, 1 find force in the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. As observed above, till the filing of the application under Section 18A of the Act, the parties as well as the Court were proceeding with the matter as if the petition was filed under Section 13 of the Act. Statutory summons were not served in prescribed form, thus there was no valid service under Section 13-B of the Act, thereby, the application for leave to defend could not be said to be time barred. The reliance placed by the learned Counsellor the respondent on the judgment of this Court in Narinder Singh's case (supra) is misconceived as in the said case it has not been held that in absence of service of statutory summons also, the petition is to be treated as time barred, rather in the said case, it was observed that the petitioner can have no grievance for non-service of summons in Schedule II as plea for leave to defend was considered on merit. The situation in the present: case practically is also the same, as besides holding the application to be beyond limitation, the learned Rent Controller, in fact, has considered the plea of the petitioner on merit.
1