Landlord-Tenant Law – Service of Summons – Compliance with Statutory Provisions – NRI landlord filed eviction petition under Section 24(3) of the Punjab Rent Act, 1995 – Tenants claimed improper service and non-receipt of eviction petition copy – Held, Rent Controller and Appellate Authority correctly found that petitioners were duly served – Process Server's report confirmed delivery of summons and petition copies – Presumption of regularity under Illustration (e) of Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 applied – Petitioners’ applications were tactics to delay eviction [Paras 1-16].

Judicial Acts – Presumption of Regularity – Evidence Act – Presumption that judicial and official acts are performed regularly – No exceptional circumstances shown by petitioners to rebut this presumption – Statutory requirements for service under Sections 38(4) and 38(5) of the Punjab Rent Act, 1995 met – Petitioners' argument on missing words "a copy annexed" in summons format rejected [Para 11].

Decision: Petition dismissed with costs – Orders of Rent Controller and Appellate Authority upheld – Petitioners' applications found to be misuse of process to delay eviction – Costs of Rs. 25,000 imposed on petitioners [Para 16].

Motor Accident Claims – Quantum of Compensation – Future Prospects – Deceased aged 59, near retirement – Tribunal awarded compensation based on current income, including future prospects – Appeal contended income should reduce post-retirement – Court upheld Tribunal's approach, citing consistent income assessment and future prospects as per legal precedents [Paras 1-11].

Legal Representatives – Claim Eligibility – Major Son – Appeal questioned maintainability of claim by major earning son – Court affirmed right of legal representatives, including major earning sons, to claim compensation under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act – Dependence on deceased not a restrictive criterion [Paras 10-11].

Judicial Precedents – Consistency in Compensation Awards – Referenced K.R. Madhusudan, Pranay Sethi, and Birender cases – Highlighted non-applicability of split multiplier and inclusion of future prospects in compensation calculation – Court emphasized consistency with Supreme Court rulings [Paras 6-11].

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Held – Tribunal’s compensation determination affirmed – Deceased’s income at time of accident and future prospects correctly considered – Major son’s claim upheld as per legal representative rights – Appeal dismissed with no errors in Tribunal’s judgment [Paras 9-12].

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 6 Rule 17 - Amendment of Pleadings - Subsequent Event - Held, transfer of drug license to landlord’s son is a subsequent event. No admission by landlord that would be recalled by amendment. Amendment allowed to reflect the change and avoid filing another suit. [Paras 1-11]

Rent Petition for Eviction - Amendment of Pleadings - Analysis - Held: The Rent Controller's finding that the landlord admitted facts in cross-examination was incorrect. Subsequent events, like the transfer of the drug license, justify the amendment. As per Supreme Court's precedent, such amendments are permissible when they reflect subsequent developments affecting the case's merits. [Paras 4-8]

Decision - Revision Petition Allowed - Court allowed the amendment of pleadings, setting aside the Rent Controller’s order. Petitioner's application for amendment of pleadings to be taken on record and the eviction petition to proceed in accordance with law. [Paras 11-12]

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 - Section 13 - Registration Act, 1908, Sections 17(1)(d) and 49 - Non-payment of Rent - Unregistered Rent Note - Held, even an unregistered rent note can be read in evidence for collateral purposes, such as determining the purpose of tenancy and assessing provisional rent. [Para 7]

Failure to Deposit Provisionally Assessed Rent - Ejectment Order - Analysis - Held: Failure to deposit the provisionally assessed rent will result in an eviction order. Any dispute regarding the provisional assessment can only be raised subsequently, as the assessment is evidently provisional and made before the commencement of evidence. [Paras 8-9]

Decision - Petition Dismissed - Court dismissed the revision petitions, upholding the order of eviction for non-payment of rent and the admissibility of the unregistered rent note for collateral purposes. [Paras 9-10]

Constitution of India - Articles 14, 226 - Right to Equality and Non-Discrimination - Held, in the absence of a legal right to a benefit, it cannot be claimed even if granted to others. Granting such benefits would perpetuate illegality. There is no negative equality; only a person with a right can claim equality. Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-25]

Grant of Premature Increment - Non-Participation in Strike - Analysis - Held: The petitioners, who were ad-hoc employees at the time of the strike on February 8, 1978, cannot claim the benefit of one premature increment as per the Supreme Court's decision. Granting benefits to similarly situated employees without a legal right does not entitle the petitioners to the same. [Paras 15-23]

Decision - Petition Dismissed - Court dismissed the petitioners' claim for the grant of one premature increment, upholding the respondents' decision to decline the benefit based on the Supreme Court's rulings in Civil Appeals No. 3487-3492 of 2004 and SLP No. 3874 of 2009. [Paras 24-25]

Punjab Town Improvement (Utilisation of Land and Allotment of Plots) Rules, 1983 - Discretionary Allotment - Legality - Held, discretionary allotments by the Chairman of the Ludhiana Improvement Trust without adherence to the applicable rules are illegal. Allotments were made in gross contravention of the rules, with no power vested in the Chairman to make such allotments. Lower courts' judgments and decrees perpetuated illegal allotments. [Paras 1-27]

Cancellation of Discretionary Allotments - Jurisdiction and Due Process - Analysis - Held: The Chairman of the Ludhiana Improvement Trust had no authority to make discretionary allotments. The process lacked adherence to the rules requiring public advertisement and draw of lots. The plaintiffs did not fall under any of the categories eligible for such allotments. The cancellation of allotments by the State Government was justified, and the lower courts erred in reinstating the allotments. [Paras 12-27]

Decision - Appeals Allowed - Judgments and decrees of the lower courts are set aside. The suits filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed. Amounts paid towards the allotment of flats to be refunded with interest at 12% per annum from the date of receipt until realization. [Paras 26-27]

Land Acquisition Act, 1894/2013 - Sections 23(1A), 23(2), and 28 - Compulsory Acquisition - Interest and Additional Compensation - Held, in compulsory acquisition, an appreciation price at 12% per annum from the date of notification is payable. Decree holder entitled to benefits under Sections 23(1A), 23(2), and 28. [Para 11]

Arrears Paid in Installments - Interest Calculation - Analysis - Held: Decree holder entitled to adjust part payments firstly towards interest, then towards cost, and then towards the principal amount. Payments made in installments should follow this order. [Para 14]

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 194 LA - TDS on Acquisition of Agricultural Land - Held, TDS at 10% is not deductible on compensation for the acquisition of agricultural land. Land Acquisition Collector cannot deduct TDS on awarded or enhanced amount. [Para 16]

Decision - Revision Petition Dismissed - Court upheld the order of the Additional District Judge, Mohali, awarding enhanced compensation and interest. The decree holder is entitled to appreciation price and interest as calculated by the Executing Court. No miscarriage of justice is shown. [Paras 17-18]

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 - Section 19 - Interpretation - Held, Section 19 of the MSME Act does not apply to an arbitral award unless the procedure under Section 18 of the Act is followed. The section must be read as it is without importing or deleting any words. Application requiring deposit of 75% of the awarded amount for entertaining objections to the award by an arbitrator is not mandated unless Section 18 procedure is followed. [Paras 1-9]

Interpretation of Statutes - Applicability of MSME Act to Arbitral Awards - Analysis - Held: Careful reading of Section 19 shows no reference to an award by an arbitrator. The award of the arbitrator appears to be specifically excluded. The section must be read as it is, and the court cannot import or delete words. Therefore, Section 19 is not applicable to an award of an arbitrator unless the procedure in Section 18 is followed. [Paras 8-9]

Decision - Petition Allowed - Court set aside the order directing the petitioner to deposit 75% of the awarded amount to entertain objections against the arbitral award, emphasizing that Section 19 does not apply to arbitral awards unless Section 18 procedure is followed. [Paras 8-9]

Compassionate Appointment - Mode of Recruitment - Held, compassionate appointments do not constitute a mode of recruitment but are provided as a welfare measure to help the deceased employee's family tide over financial crisis. Application for such appointment must be made within one year of attaining majority or securing educational qualification. Petitioner's claim at age 31, long after father's death, is not valid.

Compassionate Appointment - Timeliness of Application - Analysis - Held: The policy allows a dependent child to apply for compassionate appointment within one year from attaining the age of majority or educational qualification. This typically applies to the age range of 18-21 years. Petitioner's application at age 31 after securing qualification at age 30, long after the father's death, is not covered under the policy.

Decision - Petition Dismissed - Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that compassionate appointments are meant to address immediate financial crises and cannot be sought at a late stage.