Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Applicability of CPC Principles in Rent Controller Proceedings

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the applicability of certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) in proceedings conducted by Rent Controllers under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973. The judgment came in response to a civil revision petition challenging the decision of the Rent Controller to decline an application under Order 18 Rule 3-A of the CPC.

The petitioner, Umesh Gupta, had filed the revision petition against an order dated November 1, 2019, passed by the Rent Controller in Rent Petition No.32-Rent of 2018 titled “Monika Singal vs. Umesh Gupta.” The impugned order had declined the application filed by the respondent, Monika Singal, under Order 18 Rule 3-A, CPC.

In its observation, the High Court highlighted the essence of the case, stating, “The issue revolves around the applicability of CPC provisions in Rent Controller proceedings. The petitioner raised objections and filed an application under Order 18 Rule 3-A, CPC, which was declined by the Rent Controller.”

The court referred to the relevant provisions including Section 16 and Section 18 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, along with Rule 7 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1976, and Section 23 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973. The judgment emphasized that while not all provisions of the CPC are applicable to Rent Controller proceedings, certain principles of CPC procedure are to be followed.

“The Rent Controller’s procedure is guided by CPC principles, but not all CPC provisions are applicable. Strict applicability of the CPC provisions is required for summoning and enforcing attendance of witnesses, and for execution of orders,” the High Court noted in its decision.

The court cited the precedent set by the case of “Krishan Kumar Vs. Mohan Lal (since deceased) through his LRs,” 2016(1) Rent LR 106, to establish the principle that only specific provisions of CPC that the Act provides for are applicable to the proceedings under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973.

Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the Rent Controller’s decision to decline the application under Order 18 Rule 3-A of the CPC. The civil revision filed by Umesh Gupta was dismissed.

Date of Decision: 07.08.2023

Umesh Gupta vs Monika Singal        

Latest Legal News