Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Deepak Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Sukhcharanjit Singh Thind – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral)
This common order of mine shall dispose of CR No.3031 of 2022 titled as Deepak Kumar v. Sukhcharanjit Singh Thind and CR No.3108 of 2022 titled as Pardeep Kumar and another v. Sukhcharanjit Singh Thind as similar facts and controversy are involved therein. For reference, facts are being taken from CR No.3031 of 2022.
2. By way of present revision petition, challenge has been made to an order dated 04.07.2022 passed by the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, whereby an additional issue has been framed on an application filed by the Respondent-landlord.
3. Briefly stating, the Respondent-landlord filed a petition on 24.05.2019, seeking eviction of the Petitioner-tenant from the tenanted premises i.e. shop No.3 forming part of property No.B.XX.2594 and BXX.2595, situated at Bhai Bala Chowk, Ferozepur road Ludhiana. Written statement to the same was filed by the Petitioner-tenant followed by filing of replication by the Respondent-landlord with the permission of Rent Controller on 07.01.2020. Even a rejoinder to the said replication was filed on behalf of the Petitioner-tenant.
4. Upon consideration of the pleadings, following issues were framed by the Rent Con
Pleadings in eviction cases under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act should be interpreted liberally, allowing for additional issues to be framed based on the substance of the claims rather t....
A petitioner must include all relevant grounds in the original petition; failure to do so precludes the framing of additional issues later.
The definition of 'landlord' under the 1973 Act is broad and includes various persons beyond just the owner, and tenants can be estopped from denying the landlord's title.
The admission made by the tenants in their written statement can be used as the best evidence against them, and the court upheld the eviction based on the requirement of the premises for personal use....
The court's decision was influenced by the findings of the Building Expert and the admission of the petitioner regarding ownership of commercial properties.
Late applications for framing additional issues are inadmissible if they merely aim to prolong proceedings and fill gaps in evidence.
Section 25 empowers the Rent Controller to summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses and to compel the production of evidence as the Court is empowered under CPC.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
