IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 132 Pala Mal Atma Ram Jain & Others Sh. Vinish Sood & Another CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA, J. 29.01.2025 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Phagwara whereby Rent Petition No.1814 dated 15.03.2010 herein, under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) No.1 and 2 and pro 2. petitioners No.1 and 2 and pro shop on the ground of bona fide need becaus shop in the demised premises petitioners No.1 and 2 and pro IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Atma Ram Jain & Others Vs. Sh. Vinish Sood & Another HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. D.P. Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners. *** NIDHI GUPTA, J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated passed by the learned Rent Controller, Phagwara whereby Rent 1814 dated 15.03.2010 filed by the landlord/respondent No.1 under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) seeking evic 2 and pro-forma respondent No.2 herein, has been allowed. The respondent No.1 had sought eviction of the petitioners No.1 and 2 and pro-forma respondent No.2 from the demised shop on the ground of bona fide need becaus shop in the demised premises; and arrears of rent. Eviction of the petitioners No.1 and 2 and pro-forma respondent No.2 has been ordered IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-2568-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 29.04.2025 ...Petitioner(s) ...Respondent(s) HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA , Advocate Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated passed by the learned Rent Controller, Phagwara whereby Rent filed by the landlord/respondent No.1 under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act seeking eviction of the petitioners forma respondent No.2 herein, has been allowed. The respondent No.1 had sought eviction of the forma respondent No.2 from the demised shop on the ground of bona fide need because he wanted to start his own and arrears of rent. Eviction of the forma respondent No.2 has been ordered 2 Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated passed by the learned Rent Controller, Phagwara whereby Rent filed by the landlord/respondent No.1 under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act tion of the petitioners The respondent No.1 had sought eviction of the forma respondent No.2 from the demised e he wanted to start his own and arrears of rent. Eviction of the forma respondent No.2 has been ordered SUNENA 2025.05.02 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document on ground of bona fide need of respondent No.1/landlord for and occupation. 3. pains to demonstrate to this Court that maintainable against the impugned order Controller. However, it is a clear position in law passed in a petition under Section 13 of the Act, filedbefore the Appellate Authority by learned counsel for the petitioners upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Baldev Singh 86080; and judgment of this Court in Bhupinder Singh Bansal” Law Finder Doc ID # 2594372 in the said cases, the Rent Petition had been filed under Section 13 Act. 4. 5. 29.04.2025 Sunena Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: on ground of bona fide need of respondent No.1/landlord for and occupation. Learned counsel for the petitioners has been at great pains to demonstrate to this Court that maintainable against the impugned order . However, it is a clear position in law passed in a petition under Section 13 of the Act, before the Appellate Authority by the aggrieved party by learned counsel for the petitioners upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme “Baldev Singh Bajwa Vs. Monish Saini” Law Finder Doc ID # and judgment of this Court in “Ved Parkash Bhupinder Singh Bansal” Law Finder Doc ID # 2594372 in the said cases, the Rent Petition had been filed under Section 13 Present petition is accordingly, Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No on ground of bona fide need of respondent No.1/landlord for his own use Learned counsel for the petitioners has been at great pains to demonstrate to this Court that present Revision Petition is maintainable against the impugned order passed by the learned Rent . However, it is a clear position in law and Statute that in an order passed in a petition under Section 13 of the Act, an appeal is to be by the aggrieved party. Reliance placed by learned counsel for the petitioners upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Bajwa Vs. Monish Saini” Law Finder Doc ID # “Ved Parkash & Another Vs. Bhupinder Singh Bansal” Law Finder Doc ID # 2594372, is misconceived as in the said cases, the Rent Petition had been filed under Section 13-B of the accordingly, dismissed. Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. (Nidhi Gupta) Judge 2 own use Learned counsel for the petitioners has been at great Revision Petition is ent that in an order to be Reliance placed by learned counsel for the petitioners upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Bajwa Vs. Monish Saini” Law Finder Doc ID # & Another Vs. , is misconceived as B of the SUNENA 2025.05.02 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document