ROSHAN LAL v. DHARAM PAL SINCE DECEASED THROUGH SANJEEV KUMAR
CR/4902/2024 · 2025-08-26
Vikas Bahl
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 81052 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 81052 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CM-16397-CII-2025 in/and -1- CR-4902-2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (133) CM-16397-CII-2025 in/and CR-4902-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: - 26.08.2025 Roshan Lal ....Petitioner Versus Dharam Pal since deceased through LR Sanjeev Kumar .....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present:- Mr. Krishan Singh, Advocate, for the applicant-petitioner. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) CM-16397-CII-2025
1. Present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC for revival of the above-mentioned revision petition.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. The order dated 27.09.2024 is recalled and the main revision petition is restored to its original number. CR-4902-2024
1. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the judgment dated 06.03.2018 passed by the Rent Controller, vide which the application under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & NARESH KUMAR 2025.08.26 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgement
CM-16397-CII-2025 in/and -2- CR-4902-2024 (O&M) Eviction) Act, 1973, filed by the respondent-landlord, was allowed and the petitioner-tenant was directed to vacate the premises within three months from the date of the said order. Challenge is also to the judgment dated 12.08.2024, vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in possession of the premises till date but after arguing for some time and seeing that this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter, on instructions from his client, has submitted that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the present revision petition but has sought time to vacate the premises and to shift to another premises. It has been stated that the petitioner is a tenant in the premises for the last more than 10 years.
3. In view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present revision petition with the following observations/directions:- (i) The petitioner would be permitted to occupy the premises till 26.02.2026, subject to the conditions mentioned hereinafter and would vacate the premises and hand over the keys of the premises to the respondent on or before 26.02.2026. (ii) The petitioner would pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- per month from the month of September, 2025 up to the period the petitioner stays in occupation, on or before 10th of every month. (iii) The petitioner would pay the arrears of rent, if any, within a period of two months from today.
NARESH KUMAR 2025.08.26 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgement
CM-16397-CII-2025 in/and -3- CR-4902-2024 (O&M) (iv) The petitioner would file an undertaking on the said three aspects before the Executing Court within a period of three weeks from today with an advance copy to counsel for the landlord in the Executing Court.
4. It is made clear that in case the petitioner does not submit the said undertaking or does not comply with any of the abovesaid conditions then it would be open to the landlord to seek immediate possession of the premises in question from the petitioner by applying for police help in addition to taking recourse to other proceedings including the Contempt of Courts Act.
5. In view of what has been observed above, the present revision petition is disposed of.
6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
( VIKAS BAHL ) August 26, 2025
JUDGE naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No NARESH KUMAR 2025.08.26 15:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgement