Vimal Jindal vs Surinder Singh Dhillon

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 3096

RAJBIR SEHRAWAT
Vimal Jindal – Appellant
Versus
Surinder Singh Dhillon – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Puneet Jindal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Navroop Jawanda, Advocate; For the Petitioner
Mr. Divanshu Jain, Advocate; For the Respondents

Table of Content
1. introduction and overview of the case. (Para 1 , 2)
2. details of the tenancy and landlord's background. (Para 3)
3. tenant's contestation regarding landlord's bona fide. (Para 4)
4. presentation of evidence by both parties. (Para 5 , 6)
5. rent controller's ruling on landlord's bona fide need. (Para 7)
6. arguments from tenant and landlords on bona fide necessity. (Para 8 , 9)
7. legal provisions governing landlord's rights. (Para 10 , 11)
8. clarification on landlord’s requirement vs. necessity. (Para 12 , 14 , 15)
9. tenant's claims on landlords’ alleged bad faith examined. (Para 16 , 17)
10. clarification of legal standards on landlord's claims. (Para 18 , 19)
11. limited scope of high court's review. (Para 20)
12. final ruling and order on eviction. (Para 21 , 22 , 23)

JUDGMENT

Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral)

This shall dispose of two civil revision petitions filed by the petitioner/tenant against the judgment dated 09.10.2014 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh and the judgment dated 20.01.2016 passed by the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, because both are arising between the same parties; though from the two different eviction petitions but relating to two different p