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

2024 Supreme(P&H) 1524

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Ram Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Satish Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Respondent:Mr. Sandeep Berwal, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)

Challenge in the present revision petition is to the judgment dated 15.11.2017 vide which the petition filed by the respondent-landlord under Section 13 of the Haryana Rent Act of 1973 had been allowed by the Rent Controller, Kaithal on the ground of bona fide necessity and the petitioner had been directed to hand over the vacant possession of the tenanted premises in question within a period of two months. Challenge is also to the judgment dated 31.07.2024 vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner had been dismissed by the Appellate Authority. It would be relevant to note that in the said appeal, the cross-objections of the respondent had been allowed, however, no separate revision has been filed to challenge the same.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the observations made by the 1st Appellate Authority in para 24 of its judgment and has submitted that the rent deed dated 12.01.2000 relied upon by the landlord had been tampered with, inasmuch as, instead of 15% increase in the rent after every three years the said document contains 45% increase after every three years and has submitted that in order to prove the said interpola

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