Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Faquir Chand Vs. V.

Faquir Chand vs V.

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Aug 26, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1066634

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Faquir Chand

Respondent

V.

Excerpt

civil revision no.5106 of 2013 [1].in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh civil revision no.5106 of 2013 (o&m) date of decision:26. 8.2013 faquir chand .petitioner v. amrit wadhwa .respondent coram: hon'ble mr.justice rajesh bindal present: mr.ranjit saini, advocate for the petitioner..rajesh bindal j. the tenant is before this court impugning the order dated 25.5.2013, passed by the appellate authority, whereby the appeal filed against the order dated 3.9.2012, passed by the rent controller, disposing of the eviction petition as compromised with increase in rent, was dismissed. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in possession of a small shop measuring 3-1/2' x12', which was taken on rent @ ` 500/- per month in 2006. he further submitted that though in the order passed by the rent controller on 3.9.2012, it has been noticed that the matter in dispute was compromised with rent fixed at ` 4,800/- per month payable from 1.9.2012 with annual increase of 8%, however, the petitioner had not consented to the same. his signatures were obtained fraudulently by the counsel. after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, i do not find any merit in the submissions made. the rent controller has specifically noticed in the order dated 3.9.2012 that when the case was taken up for hearing, the petitioner, who was present in court, got his statement recorded that the matter in dispute has been compromised with the landlord and the rent was revised to ` 4,800/- per month payable w.e.f.1.9.2012 with annual kumar mano.2013.08.27 11:12 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil revision no.5106 of 2013 [2].increase of 8%. in view of the above, the petitioner, being present in court, who is not illiterate and getting his statement recorded, he cannot be permitted to back out from the same. dismissed. (rajesh bindal) judge 26.8.2013 mk kumar mano.2013.08.27 11:12 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Full Judgment

Civil Revision No.5106 of 2013 [1].IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.5106 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision:

26. 8.2013 Faquir Chand .Petitioner v.

Amrit Wadhwa .Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner..Rajesh Bindal J.

The tenant is before this court impugning the order dated 25.5.2013, passed by the appellate authority, whereby the appeal filed against the order dated 3.9.2012, passed by the Rent Controller, disposing of the eviction petition as compromised with increase in rent, was dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in possession of a small shop measuring 3-1/2' x12', which was taken on rent @ ` 500/- per month in 2006.

He further submitted that though in the order passed by the Rent Controller on 3.9.2012, it has been noticed that the matter in dispute was compromised with rent fixed at ` 4,800/- per month payable from 1.9.2012 with annual increase of 8%, however, the petitioner had not consented to the same.

His signatures were obtained fraudulently by the counsel.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the submissions made.

The Rent Controller has specifically noticed in the order dated 3.9.2012 that when the case was taken up for hearing, the petitioner, who was present in court, got his statement recorded that the matter in dispute has been compromised with the landlord and the rent was revised to ` 4,800/- per month payable w.e.f.1.9.2012 with annual Kumar MaNo.2013.08.27 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Civil Revision No.5106 of 2013 [2].increase of 8%.

In view of the above, the petitioner, being present in court, who is not illiterate and getting his statement recorded, he cannot be permitted to back out from the same.

Dismissed.

(Rajesh Bindal) Judge 26.8.2013 mk Kumar MaNo.2013.08.27 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial