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

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 81547

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
SUDHIR SHARMA AND OTHERS – Respondent
CR_3545_2026



##PAGE1##

CR-3545-2026 (O&M)(cid:1) Page 1 of 8

(cid:1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

123

CR-3545-2026(O&M)

Date of decision: 27.04.2026

National Insurance Co. Ltd.

...Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Sudhir Sharma & Others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:- Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate

Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate

for the petitioner.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

CM-8644-CII-2026

This is an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for

condonation of delay of 37 days in filing the present revision petition.

After going through the contents of the application, which is

supported by affidavit of the appellant, the same is allowed subject to all just

exceptions and delay of 37 days in filing the present petition is condoned.

MAIN CASE

Present Revision Petition has been filed by tenant laying challenge

to the order dated 09.03.2023 passed by the learned Rent Controller and the

order dated 30.10.2025 passed by learned Appellate Authority whereby

petition filed by the respondents/landlords under Section 13 of the East

SUNENA

2026.04.30 09:38

I agree to specified

portions of this document

(cid:1)

##PAGE2##

CR-3545-2026 (O&M)(cid:1) Page 2 of 8

(cid:1)

Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter ‘the Act’), for ejectment

of the petitioner from the demised premises, has been allowed as the

petitioner failed to deposit the provisional rent as assessed by the learned Rent

Controller; and the Appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order dated

09.03.2023 was dismissed by the learned Appellate Authority vide order dated

30.10.2025. Hence, present Revision Petition.

2. Brief facts of the case in chronological order are as follows:-

28.09.2022: The respondents/landlords had filed Ejectment Petition dated

20.09.2022 under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act,

1949, seeking ejectment of the petitioner from the demised premises on the

ground of arrears of rent.

02.02.2023: Vide order dated 02.02.2023, the Rent Controller had assessed

provisional rent to the tune of Rs.10,92,090/-; with necessary directions to the

petitioner to tender the provisionally assessed rent on 09.03.2023.

09.03.2023: On 09.03.2023 itself, the petitioner had moved instant application

before the Rent Controller for extension of time to deposit the arrears of rent;

as ostensibly, the provisional rent amount could not be procured in the short

span of time.

09.03.2023: Vide impugned order dated 09.03.2023, the said application of

the petitioner was dismissed; while also allowing the Rent Petition filed by the

respondents/landlords by directing the petitioner to hand over vacant

SUNENA

2026.04.30 09:38

I agree to specified

portions of this document

(cid:1)

##PAGE3##

CR-3545-2026 (O&M)(cid:1) Page 3 of 8

(cid:1)

possession of the premises in dispute to the landlords within two months from

the date of order.

30.10.2025: The petitioner had preferred Rent Appeal before the Appellate

Authority, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 30.10.2025.

3. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

the learned Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority failed to appreciate

that judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of “Rakesh Wadhawan &

Others Vs. M/s Jagdamaba Industrial Corop. & Others” would not be

applicable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case. In the

said case, no application for extension of time had been filed by the tenant

therein; whereas in the present case, it is admitted fact on record that prior to

the expiry of the period of 15 days, the petitioner had moved an application

for extension of time to deposit the provisional rent.

4. Ld. Counsel argues that though the learned Rent Controller

assessed the rent vide order dated 02.02.2023 and directed the petitioner-

Company to deposit the arrears of rent on 09.03.2023. However, inadvertently,

the counsel for the petitioner noted the date as 09.03.2023 for an order on the

application of assessment of rent. As such, when the counsel for the petitioner-

tenant on 09.03.2023 chec

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 Back to top