PALWINDER SINGH Vs. PARAMJIT KAUR DHILLON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of two petitions bearing C.R. No. 4642 of 2013, titled as Palwinder Singh v. Paramjit Kaur Dhillon, and COCP No. 1169 of 2014, titled as Palwinder Singh v. Paramjit Kaur Dhillon. In brief, the petitioner is a tenant in shop No. 157 owned by respondent-landlord, who had filed an application under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short "the Act") for seeking eviction of the tenant on the ground of personal necessity.

(2.) The service was effected upon the petitioner on 16.12.2011 but he filed an application under Section 18-A of the Act on 03.01.2012. The Rent Controller dismissed his application seeking leave to contest, inter alia, on the ground that the application was filed beyond the mandatory period of 15 days. The Court relied upon judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as Om Parkash v. Ashwani Kumar Barsi, 2010 9 SCC 183in support of its decision that the stipulated period of limitation in the Act cannot be extended in any case.

(3.) The petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision in this Court in which notice of motion was issued on 28.10.2013 and the parties were directed to maintain status quo with regard to possession of the property. According to the petitioner, the respondent-landlord tried to interfere in his possession, therefore, he filed COCP No. 1169 of 2014 in which no notice was issued and has been ordered to be listed along with the present revision petition. That is how the contempt petition is being decided along with this revision petition.