Shashi Jain v. Rakesh Kumar & ORS

CR No.5706 of 2017 (O&M) {1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CR No.5706 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision:08.01.2018 Shashi Jain ... Petitioner Vs.

Rakesh Kumar and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present:- Petitioner-in-person.

Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate for the respondents.

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been filed against the order of the Executing Court/Rent Controller, whereby, the objection petition filed by respondents No.7 and 8 alleging to be owners of the property by virtue of two sale deeds dated 13.08.1982 and 18.04.1994, has been dismissed. Petitioner, who appears in person in support of her contention has taken the aid of the provisions of Section 17 of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 and Order 21 Rule 101 CPC to contend that since the order of the Rent Controller is executable by the civil Court, the civil Court/Rent Controller would have all the powers to decide the sale deeds being forged and fabricated. Even the beneficiaries of the sale deeds, i.e., respondents, ibid, have also suffered statements before the Court below. Savita 2018.01.09 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CR No.5706 of 2017 (O&M) {2} Be that as it may, the fact remains that petitioner, in my view, would not have any cause of action to assail the order dismissing the objection petition filed by respondents No.7 and 8 and the remedy would be to file a civil suit by attaching the copies of the statements and obtain a judgment, in accordance with law.

Faced with this situation, petitioner, who appears in person submits that she may be allowed to withdraw the present revision petition to avail the remedy.

Ordered accordingly.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE January 08, 2018 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Savita 2018.01.09 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh