RAM PAL Vs. DEEPAK SHARMA
LAWS(P&H)-2011-3-223
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on March 22,2011

RAM PAL Appellant
VERSUS
DEEPAK SHARMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This a revision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in which two directions have been sought; i) to direct the Rent Controller to decide the application filed under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [for short "CPC"] for restoration and the application for bringing on record the legal representatives within a specified time and ii) to direct the Rent Controller to record the exact proceedings in zimni orders as they take place in the Court.
(2.) The Petitioner has alleged that his father had filed eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [for short "the Act"] against the Respondent on the grounds of non-payment of rent since November 2006 for his own and the use and occupation of his son. During the pendency of the eviction petition, father of the Petitioner expired on 24.09.2007 leaving behind his wife and his two sons including the Petitioner. The Petitioner filed an application to the Rent Controller on 27.11.2007 in order to bring them on record as legal representatives of his father. In this regard, the following zimni order was passed on 05.10.2007 by the Rent Controller: Present: Counsel for the parties. Counsel for the Respondent submitted that Petitioner has died. Now to come for filing the proper application on 27.11.2007. Sd/- RC/05.10.2007. On 27.11.2007, the following order was passed by the Rent Controller : "Present: Counsel for the parties. An application for bringing the L Rs filed. Copy given. Now case is adjourned for the reply and consideration on 11.02.2008. Sd/- RC/27.11.2007. On 11.02.2008 and 05.04.2008, following two orders were passed by the Rent Controller: Present: Sh. Sanjay Tangri, Adv. for the Plaintiffs. Sh. P.K. Kukereja, Adv. for the Defendant. Consideration not effected. Adjournment requested. Heard. Allowed. Now case is adjourned to 05.04.2008 for consideration. Sd/- RC/11.02.2008. Present: Sh. Sanjay Tangri, Adv. for the Plaintiff/Petitioner. Sh. P.K. Kukeraja, Adv. for the Defendant/Respondent. Consideration not effected. Adjournment requested. Heard. Allowed. Now to come up on 17.07.2008 for consideration. Sd/- RC/05.04.2008.
(3.) On 17.07.2008, reply to the application for brining on record the legal representatives was filed and the case was adjourned to 11.09.2008 for consideration of the application. On 11.09.2008, the following order was passed by the Rent Controller: Present: Counsel for the parties. On request, adjourned to 03.10.2008 for consideration on application for bringing the LRs of Plaintiff on record. Sd/- RC/11.09.2008. On 03.10.2008, again the following order was passed by the Rent Controller: Present: Counsel for the parties. On request, adjourned to 04.12.2008 for consideration on application for bringing the LRs of Plaintiff on record. Sd/- CJ(JD)/03.10.2008.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.