Skip to content


Letters Patent Appeal No.983 of 2014 Vs. Panjab University, Chandigarh and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Letters Patent Appeal No.983 of 2014

Respondent

Panjab University, Chandigarh and Others

Excerpt:


.....(eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “act”.).counsel for the appellant submits that apart from the fact that the shop in dispute is not public premises as it was donated to the university, the rent was arbitrarily increased to rs.21,600/- per month and as the appellant could not pay this amount, he has been ordered to be evicted. it is further contended that as the appellant is in possession since 1973, there was no reason for the university to enhance the rent to rs.21,600/-. we have heard counsel for the appellant, perused the impugned order as well as orders of eviction. varinder kumar the shop, in dispute, was, admittedly, donated to the 2014.07.02 16:17 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh letters patent appeal no.983 of 2014 2 university and, therefore, must necessarily answer to the description of “public premises”. as contained in the aforesaid act. the plea that the university arbitrarily enhanced rent to rs.21,600/- per month, is not germane to the controvers.in hand. the appellant having failed to pay rent, as determined by the university, has been rightly ordered to be.....

Judgment:


LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.983 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.983 of 2014 Date of Decision: 17.6.2014 Satyendra Dutt Bhanot ..Appellant versus Panjab University, Chandigarh and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present: Mr.Ranjit Saini, Advocate, for the appellant.

RAJIVE BHALLA, J.

The appeal, in hand, is directed against order dated 2.4.2014 dismissing the petitioner's writ petition, whereby the petitioner challenged order of eviction, passed under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”.).Counsel for the appellant submits that apart from the fact that the shop in dispute is not public premises as it was donated to the University, the rent was arbitrarily increased to Rs.21,600/- per month and as the appellant could not pay this amount, he has been ordered to be evicted.

It is further contended that as the appellant is in possession since 1973, there was no reason for the University to enhance the rent to Rs.21,600/-.

We have heard counsel for the appellant, perused the impugned order as well as orders of eviction.

Varinder Kumar The shop, in dispute, was, admittedly, donated to the 2014.07.02 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.983 of 2014 2 University and, therefore, must necessarily answer to the description of “Public Premises”.

as contained in the aforesaid Act.

The plea that the University arbitrarily enhanced rent to Rs.21,600/- per month, is not germane to the controveRs.in hand.

The appellant having failed to pay rent, as determined by the University, has been rightly ordered to be evicted.

The impugned orders of eviction and order dismissing the writ petition, do not suffer from any error of jurisdiction or of law, as would require interference.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine.

( RAJIVE BHALLA ) JUDGE ( HARINDER SINGH SIDHU ) 17.6.2014 JUDGE VK Varinder Kumar 2014.07.02 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //