DARSHNA RANI Vs. BASHESHAR NATH TRUST
LAWS(P&H)-2007-10-13
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on October 11,2007

Darshna Rani Appellant
VERSUS
Basheshar Nath Trust Respondents

JUDGEMENT

VINOD K.SHARMA, J. - (1.) THIS Revision Petition has been filed against the order dated 17.8.2006 passed by learned Rent Controller vide which an application moved by the petitioner-tenant under Order 6 Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for amendment of the written statement, has been ordered to be dismissed.
(2.) THE respondent-landlord filed a petition for eviction of the petitioner from House No. 3301/21, Saudagar Bazar, Ambala Cantt. under the provisions of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short the 'Act'). The petitioner by way of amendment sought to (raise) a plea that house in question was owned by the Government of India and managed by the Cantonment Board which created only occupancy rights in favour of one Lalla Bisheshar Nath. The said Lalla Bisheshar Nath had created a Trust on the premises in question through gift deed dated 20.10.1945 and appointed all eleven trustees to manage the property on behalf of holder of occupancy rights i.e. Lalla Bisheshar Nath. It was claimed that ownership of the building always remained with Government of India and occupancy right holder i.e. Lalla Bisheshar Nath Trust created by him, were only having rights in property on the basis of old grant and they never had the ownership title regarding the premises in question. It was claimed that all the buildings owned by the Government of India/Cantonment Board/Municipal Council/State Government are exempted from the provisions of the Act and as such, no petition for eviction can be filed regarding those buildings, nor Rent Controller has jurisdiction to entertain and decide such a petition. It was claimed that house in question also belongs to the Government of India as per general land record, Ambala Cantt. Survey No. 207/2642 dated 5.8.2005.
(3.) TENANT -petitioner sought to amend his written statement by asserting facts mentioned above, the application was contested. The averments made in the application, was denied. The respondent-landlord further denied that the house in question was owned by the Government of India and managed by the Cantonment Board.;


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