VINOD KUMAR versus PREM LATA

VINOD KUMAR versus PREM LATA

The Court reaffirmed that Rakesh Wadhawan's case correctly lays down the law; the interpretation of Section 13(2)(i) and its proviso, as applied under the Punjab Act, equally applies to the Haryana Act. The Controller is obliged to calculate and determine arrears, interest, and costs by way of a provisional judicial order, based on summary enquiry, to ensure compliance by the tenant on the first date of hearing.

Parties
Petitioner/appellant: Vinod Kumar; Respondent: Prem Lata
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Review Petition (c) No. 436 of 2003 in Civil Appeal No. 8444 of 2002 / Supreme Court Review After Prior Remand to Rent Controller
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Default in Payment of Rent, Statutory Interpretation
Rent Control Eviction Default in Payment of Rent Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vinod Kumar

Petitioner/appellant

Prem Lata

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Petition (c) No. 436 of 2003 in Civil Appeal No. 8444 of 2002 / Supreme Court Review After Prior Remand to Rent Controller

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the law laid down in Rakesh Wadhawan's case is correct and applicable to Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, Section 13(2)(i)
  2. 2 Whether the Rent Controller is obliged to calculate arrears of rent, interest, and costs under Section 13(2)(i) of the Haryana Act

Ratio Decidendi

The Court reaffirmed that Rakesh Wadhawan's case correctly lays down the law; the interpretation of Section 13(2)(i) and its proviso, as applied under the Punjab Act, equally applies to the Haryana Act. The Controller is obliged to calculate and determine arrears, interest, and costs by way of a provisional judicial order, based on summary enquiry, to ensure compliance by the tenant on the first date of hearing.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Review Petition dismissed as devoid of merit.
  • Rakesh Wadhawan's case reaffirmed and applied to Haryana Act.