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

1988 Supreme(P&H) 544

D.V.SEHGAL
Tara Chand – Appellant
Versus
Sheo Parshad – Respondent


Judgment

D.V.Sehgal, J.

1. The landlord-respondent filed an application under Section 13 of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short `the Act) against the tenant-petitioner in the Court of the learned Rent Controller, Ambala for his eviction on the ground that he has neither paid nor tendered rent for the period 1.8.1983 to 31.7.1986. Notice of this application was issued to the petitioner. He was served on 15.9.1986. He was required to appear in Court on 21.10.1986. He, however, did not appear in response to the summons on that date. Therefore, the learned Rent Controller took ex parte proceedings against him.

2. A week thereafter, the petitioner filed an application on 28.10.1986 for seting aside the ex parte proceedings. He alleged that the notice of the Court which he had received had been misplaced. He was under the wrong impression that the date of hearing was 25.10.1986 but when he came to the Court on that date he learnt that he had been proceeded against ex parte on 21.10.1986. He sought setting aside the ex parte proceedings. The prayer was opposed by the respondent who filed his reply to the application on 28.11.1986. Vide order dated 9.3.1987 the





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