Joginder Pal v. Mohan Singh

CR No. 7324 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR-7324-2023 (O&M) Decided on : 29.09.2025 Joginder Pal ......Petitioner

Versus

Mohan Singh ......Respondent CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Prateek Sodhi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Umesh Aggarwal, Advocate For the respondent.

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

The petitioner herein is the tenant before the learned Rent Controller, Amritsar in rent petition No. 133 of 2023 titled Mohan Singh Vs. Joginder Pal. He is aggrieved by the order dated 04.11.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed by trial court, whereby his application for submitting interrogatories to the landlord (respondent herein) i.e. petitioner before the Rent Controller, was rejected.

2.

As is borne out from the records, landlord i.e. respondent herein filed petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 against the tenant i.e. petitioner herein seeking his eviction from the demised shop on various grounds including non-payment of rent and bonafide need. After putting in appearance, instead of filing the reply to the ejectment petition, the said tenant moved an application under Order XI Rule 1 read with Rules 12 and 14 along with Section 151 CPC seeking leave of the Court to deliver interrogatories to the landlord on various issues, such as - whether petitioner is filing income tax returns; whether he is showing the rent received in his income tax returns; as to who are owners of the property; whether there are other tenants in the JITEN SHARMA 2025.09.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 1 of 2 Pages

CR No. 7324 of 2023 property; as to whether any other litigation is pending pertaining to the other tenants and total area of the property. 3.

Learned Rent Controller has rejected the application by holding that tenant cannot be allowed to do so prior to filing of his written statement.

4.

Assailing the impugned order, learned counsel contends that leave of the Court to deliver interrogatories was sought to curtail the delay. 5.

This Court does not find any merit in the contention. The clear objective of the petitioner-tenant appears to be to delay the proceedings of the ejectment proceedings and not to curtail the delay. Learned Rent Controller has not committed any illegality or perversity while passing the impugned order. Holding the present revision petition to be devoid of any merit, the same is hereby dismissed.

(DEEPAK GUPTA) 29.09.2025 JUDGE Jiten Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No JITEN SHARMA 2025.09.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page N: 2 of 2 Pages