Total Pageviews

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Government Servant--Petitioner had retired on 31.5.1999--He acquired the ownership of demised premises on 17.11.1999

2010(1) LAW HERALD (P&H) 89
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gurdev Singh
Civil Revision No. 2099 of 2003(O&M)
Dharam Singh
v.
Smt. Veena & Ors.
{Decided on 17/11/2009}
For the Petitioner: Mr. G.P.Vashisht, Advocate.
For the Respondents: None.
(A) East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Extension to Chandigarh) Act, 1974, S.13-A, 2(hh)--Eviction--Specified landlord--Government Servant--Petitioner had retired on 31.5.1999--He acquired the ownership of demised premises on 17.11.1999--He was not a specified land lord on the date of his retirement--Not entitled to the benefit of Section 13-A of the Act--Petition dismissed with costs of Rs,10,000/-. (P.12)
(B) East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Extension to Chandigarh) Act, 1974, S.13-A, 2(hh)--Eviction--Specified land lord--Government Servant--Summary procedure--To get the benefit of summary procedure the land lord must be a specified landlord at the time of his retirement. (P.13)

---------------
Prit