Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1026 (PNJ)

Amrik Singh v. Jassi Ram

2003-07-29

HEMANT GUPTA

body2003
Judgment Hemant Gupta, J. 1. The petitioners are aggrieved against the notice Annexure P. 1 issued under section 6 of the Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why an order requiring them to pay the arrears of rent should not be made. 2. Such show cause notice has been issued on an application filed by the Receiver appointed by the Civil Court on 31.5.2000 in a suit filed by respondents No. 1 to 4 under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 14 of the Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1997 for removal of the defendant as Mohatmim (Trustee) of Thakurdwara situated at Village Kheri Naga. 3. Initially, Mr. Naveen Markan, Advocate, was appointed as Receiver but it is admitted at the bar that subsequently, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sunam has been appointed as Receiver. Receiver has moved an application calling upon the tenants such as the petitioners to pay arrears of rent under the provisions of the aforesaid Act. A show cause notice has been issued. It is at that stage, the petitioners have moved to this court. 4. A perusal of the provisions of the Act and the order would show that the Receiver has been appointed to protect the property of Thakurdwara Kheri Naga and to collect Batai Chakota and to agitate the matter for recovery of Batai Chakota from the tenants. Therefore, the Receiver was well within its jurisdiction to invoke jurisdiction of the Collector in terms of the aforesaid Act when it is not disputed that Thakurdwara is a religious institution as defined in the Act. Section 6 of the Act empowers the Collector to pass an order requiring any person who is in arrears of rent payable in respect of any religious premises to pay the same. The Collector may, by order, require that person to pay the same within such time and in such instalments as may be specified in the order. Section 6 of the Act reads as under: "6. The Collector may, by order, require that person to pay the same within such time and in such instalments as may be specified in the order. Section 6 of the Act reads as under: "6. Power to recover damages in respect of religious premises as arrears of land revenue:- (1) Where any person is in arrears of rent payable in respect of any religious premises, the Collector may, by order, require that person to pay the same within such time and in such instalments as may be specified in the order. (2) Where any person is, or has at any time been, in unauthorised occupation of any religious premises the Collector may, having regard to reasonable principles of assessment of damages, assess the damages on account of the use and occupation of such premises and may by order, require that person to pay the damages within such time and in instalments as may be specified in the order. (3) No order under Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) shall be made against any person until after the issue of a notice, in writing, to the person calling upon him to show cause within such time as may be specified in the notice, why such order should not be made, and until his objections, if any, and any evidence he may produce in support of the same have been considered by the Collector." 5. In view of above, there is no error of jurisdiction when the Collector issued notice to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause why an order requiring him to pay the said arrears of rent should not be made, warranting interference by this court in the Revisional jurisdiction. Dismissed.