OM PARKASH MEHTA Vs. GURDIAL MAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-tenant challenges the order dated 19.11.2013 passed by the Rent Controller, Pathankot whereby, eviction has been ordered under Sec. 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (in short 'the Act') after leave to contest was granted in a revision petition filed under Sec. 18-A of the Act.

(2.) Proceedings were deferred for 205.2017 whereby, counsel submitted that the petitioner does not want time for relocation and the matter be decided on merits. Accordingly, the present revision petition is being dismissed for the reasons given as under:-

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that on an earlier occasion, a petition under Sec. 13 of the Act had been filed on 16.01.1997 which was decided against the respondent on 14.06.2001. It was accordingly argued that the same was upheld on 04.06.2008 and once the bonafides have been doubted as such, the Court was not justified in ordering eviction in a petition which was instituted during the pendency of the appeal of the first petition filed under Sec. 13 of the Act. Reliance was accordingly been placed upon the judgment in Pawan Kumar Gupta Vs. Rochiram Nagdeo, 1999 (2) SCR 767 that it would now operate as res judicata.