SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(P&H) 887

M.M.KUMAR
S. Nihal Singh Motors – Appellant
Versus
Shama Malhotra Etc. – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This order shall dispose of Civil Revision No.3462 of 2004 (1st petition) and Civil Revision No.3463 of 2004 (2nd petition) filed by the tenant-petitioners under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for brevity the Act). The challenge in both the petitions is to the two orders dated 14.6.2004.

2. In the 1st petition challenge is to order dated 14.6.2004 passed by the Rent Controller, Ludhiana dismissing an application in which prayer was made for setting aside exparte order dated 12.8.2003. In the second petition, Challenge is to order dated 14.6.2004 passed by executing court dismissing the objection of the tenant-petitioner judgment debtor to the execution proceedings taken by the landlady respondent. The landlady respondent had filed an application for execution of order dated 12.8.2003 passed by the Rent Controller for ejectment of the tenant-petitioners from the demised shop. (I) Brief facts concerning the order of provisional rent and striking of defence.

3. Brief facts necessary for deciding the controversy raised in the instant petitions are that the land-lady respondent filed an ejectment petition registered as Civil S




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top