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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2460

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Jaidev Duggal – Appellant
Versus
Narinderjit Kaur Anandpuri – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Ravish Bansal, Advocate; For the Petitioner
Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, Advocate; For the Respondent

JUDGMENT

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

The petitioner herein is a tenant. He has been ordered to be evicted by the Rent Controller. This revision petition has been filed to challenge the correctness of the order passed by the Rent Controller.

2. A petition under Section 13B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1949 Act ") was filed by the respondent, who is a Non-Resident Indian. A special provision has been made under Section 13B of the 1949 Act for immediate delivery of the possession of the premises owned by a Non-Resident Indian who wishes to come back and settle in the country of his/her origin. This special right is available only after a period of five years from the date of becoming the owner and only once in the life time of such an owner. In this case, the petition was filed on 05.01.2013. Initially, the Rent Controller did not grant the leave to contest, however, on the intervention of the High Court, the petitioner was granted the leave to contest. Thereafter, the Rent Controller, on the appreciation of evidence, found that the requirement of the landlady is bonafide as she wishes to open a Food Plaza in the building which consists o

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