Chandigarh, May 28
Hearing a contempt of court case, Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan of the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the police and the district administration to ensure that the possession of a rented property was handed over to the landlord.
- Once it is admitted by respondent that they were inducted as tenants by the petitioners for all intents and purposes, it is the petitioners who are the landlords of the respondent
The tenant in the case had given an undertaking that he would vacate the premises on March 31, 2021. However, he started filing applications thereafter, such as a review plea, to withdraw the statement made before the court on the basis of which the decree was passed.
Justice Sangwan said the respondent-tenant also undertook to continue paying the mesne profit or the use and occupation charges from September 2018. He took due benefit of the consent/decree compromise and enjoyed the possession till March 31, 2021.
The respondent, thereafter, filed applications and tried to set up a new case by filing a suit for mandatory injunction against the municipal corporation concerned. It was stated that the petitioners were not the property owners. It was the municipal corporation or a woman.
The respondent-tenant never challenged that the petitioners were not the landlords. Even his induction as a tenant in the premises was not disputed. “Once it is admitted by the respondent that they were inducted as tenants by the petitioners for all intents and purposes, it is the petitioners who are the landlords of the respondent.”
Otherwise also, a suit was not filed by the municipal corporation. Rather, the respondent filed a suit for mandatory injunction to declare the municipal corporation the owner. Again, a deceitful method was adopted by the respondent to wilfully breach the undertaking given in the court, Justice Sangwan added.
The respondent was held guilty of intentional and wilful disobedience of the judgment and decree dated August 10, 2018, vide which he gave an undertaking to vacate the tenanted premises by March 31, 2021.
Justice Sangwan asserted that the respondent-tenant was liable to be convicted in view of the well-settled principle of law and to maintain the majesty of law. Fixing the case for May last week, Justice Sangwan directed that Bathinda Deputy Commissioner, in the meantime, would depute the local tehsildar/naib tehsildar as the duty magistrate to hand over the possession to the petitioners.
Bathinda Senior Superintendent of Police was also directed to provide adequate police help to hand over the vacant possession of the shop in dispute to the petitioners before submitting a compliance affidavit.
Justice Sangwan made it clear that the respondent-tenant would be taken in civil imprisonment following failure to hand over the possession of the premises/shop or creating any hindrance in handing over the possession by putting a lock. The imprisonment would continue till the possession was handed over to the petitioners.
Most Read In 24 Hours
Don't MissView All
This comes amid a diplomatic row between India and Canada ov...
Doraiswami was on Friday stopped by a few radicals from ente...
India's envoy to UK should not have been stopped from entering gurdwara, say Manjinder Sirsa, SGPC general secretary Grewal
Condemn incident involving Indian envoy to UK
Governments will have to talk to each other and see how they take it forward: Jaishankar on India-Canada row
Was speaking to Indian journalists in Washington
Grenade used for attack on Punjab Police's Mohali headquarters was for Sidhu Moosewala; Khalistani terrorist Rinda had supplied it
Rinda died due to alleged drug overdose at a military hospit...