Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 443 (HP)

Narender Kumar v. Sushil Kumar

2014-04-23

SANJAY KAROL

body2014
Judgment : Sanjay Karol, J (oral) In this petition, filed under Section 24(5) of Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as Act), petitioner, who is the tenant/Judgment Debtor, has assailed order dated 11.09.2013 passed by Rent Controller Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P., in Execution Petition No. 0300020/2012, titled as Sh. Sushil Kumar Versus Sh. Narender Kumar, as upheld by the Appellate Authority, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P., in Rent Appeal No.9-R/14 of 2013, titled as Sh. Narender Kumar Versus Sh. Sushil Kumar, on 02.12.2013. 2. The fact that petition for ejectment filed by the landlord, on the ground of non-payment of rent stands allowed, is not in dispute. The landlord filed an application under Section 26 of the Act seeking execution of such order is not in dispute. Tenant also filed objections for adjustment of excess payment allegedly made to the landlord as monthly rent. 3. Noticeably Courts below, without considering the objections filed by the present petitioner, allowed the landlord’s application and directed dispossession of the petitioner from the tenanted premises. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as also perused the record, I am of the considered view that orders passed by the Courts below, need to be quashed and set aside on this short ground. Rent Controller could not have decided the application in isolation. 5. As such, order dated 11.09.2013, passed by Rent Controller Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P., in Execution Petition No. 0300020/2012, titled as Sh. Sushil Kumar Versus Sh. Narender Kumar as affirmed by the Appellate Authority, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P., in Rent Appeal No.9-R/14 of 2013, titled as Sh. Narender Kumar Versus Sh. Sushil Kumar, on 02.12.2013, is quashed and set aside. 6. Execution No.0300020/2012 stands revived. Matter is remanded back to the Rent Controller Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P., with a direction to decide the application, as also the objection petition afresh, after holding due enquiry, as to whether there was any shortfall in payment of arrears of rent, in the light of order passed in ejectment petition filed under Section 14 of the Act. Needless to add, Rent Controller, shall afford opportunity of leading evidence to both the parties while forming opinion as to whether there is any shortfall or not. 7. Parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 30.05.2014.