AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Permod Kohli, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order dated 12th September, 2006 whereby, the Rent Controller,
Chandigarh has rejected the prayer of the petitioners for grant of opportunity to file a fresh petition and dismissed the ejectment applications as
withdrawn. The petitioners are the landlords who had filed ejectment petitions before the Rent Controller. Chandigarh. From the record, it appears that after prosecuting the petition for a period of nine years, two out of three petitioners filed applications for withdrawal of the ejectment applications with liberty to file a fresh one. Learned Rent Controller refused liberty to file fresh petitions and accepted the applications insofar the prayer for withdrawal of applications is concerned.
Learned counsel appearing for other side submits that the petitioners have misled this court inasmuch as they have not disclosed that they have
already filed two ejectment petitions before the Rent Controller and even when liberty was denied to them. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that he is only aggrieved with the observation of the Rent Controller wherein Rent Controller has observed that all the circumstances clearly reveal that the sole motive is to harass the respondents, which is neither permissible nor justified. However, learned counsel has admitted that the petitioner has already filed two ejectment applications under Sections 13 and 13A of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act before the Rent Controller. Insofar as clarification regarding the observation of the Rent Controller in the impugned order is concern, it is clarified that these observations will have no bearing as for the future litigation is concerned.
This petition is accordingly disposed of with the above observations.