Girdhari Lal vs Punjab State Electricity Board … on 19 November, 2008

CWP NO.3030 OF 1988                                 1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
               CHANDIGARH



                     CWP NO.3030 OF 1988

                     DATE OF DECISION: 19.11.2008


Girdhari Lal                                     ..Petitioner
                   Versus
Punjab State Electricity Board and Ors     ..Respondents


                           CORUM

               HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI


Present:       None for the petitioner

               Mr.SS Sahu, AAG, Punjab

PERMOD KOHLI,J. (ORAL)

The petitioner has challenged the Collector’s order dated

12.5.87 whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be evicted and the

order dated 1.2.88 rejecting his appeal by the Appellate Authority.

The petitioner has been ordered to be evicted under the provisions of

the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery)

Act, 1973.

CWP NO.3030 OF 1988 2

In the reply filed, the respondents have stated that during the

pendency of the eviction proceedings, the petitioner represented that

he should not be evicted and taking sympathetic view, the

respondents-Board decided to lease out the shop in dispute afresh in

favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, an offer was made to him for

reallotment of the shop on the monthly rent of Rs.750.00 p.m. w.e.f.

1.7.87. This offer has been accepted by the petitioner vide his letter

dated 3.3.1988 (Annexure R-1). During the pendency of this

petition, CM No.16238 of 1988, this court passed inter locutory order

dated 16.1.1989 which reads as under:-

“Same order as in CM No.16237 of 1988 in CWP

No.3029 of 1988.”

A perusal of the aforesaid order shows that CM No.16238 of

1988 was decided in terms of the order passed in CM No.16237 of

1988 in CWP No.3029 of 1988 which reads as under:-

“The counsel for the writ-petitioner contends that his

client is ready and willing to deposit double the amount

of rent which is being already paid.

The counsel for the applicant-Board states that rent at the

rate of Rs.750/- per month has been fixed only at the
CWP NO.3030 OF 1988 3

asking and request of the petitioner by a high powered

committee constituted by the Board and he says that

dispossession be stayed only on payment of Rs.750/- per

month.

I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case

and am of the view that the writ petitioner shall deposit

double the amount of rent with arrears within two

months from today and shall continue paying by every

7th of the Calendar month and further files an

undertaking within one month that in case the writ

petition is dismissed, the balance amount of rent

calculated at the rate of Rs.750/- per month shall be paid

with 18% interest from the date the amount is due till

the date of payment. The payment of double the amount

of rent is subject to the result of the writ petition.

The petition may be heard within two years.”

Consequent upon the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed an

undertaking dated 25.1.1989 wherein the petitioner undertook to

abide by the order dated 16.1.1989 and also to pay the arrears of rent

with interest at the rate of 18% and also prayed for dismissal of the
CWP NO.3030 OF 1988 4

writ petition. It seems that thereafter the writ petition could not be

taken up for consideration.

In view of the above circumstances, no further directions are

required. Petition dismissed.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE
19.11.2008
MFK