C.R. No. 1003 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 1003 of 2010 Date of Decision: 21.09.2010 Inder Jit Singh .... Petitioner Versus Puran Dai ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Anupam Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. K.S. Rekhi, Advocate for the respondent 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging order dated 17.11.2009 passed by learned Rent Controller, Amritsar thereby directing the landlord (respondent herein) to implead Sanjiv Kumar as one of the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is neither tenant nor in possession of the disputed property, hence, eviction petition against him is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord states that infact present petitioner has taken plea that he is not a tenant in possession while his son is tenant and in possession of disputed property, hence, in view of this landlord may be permitted to withdraw the present eviction petition itself with liberty to file fresh eviction C.R. No. 1003 of 2010 2 petition against the son of the petitioner who is infact tenant in possession. Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord further states that anything done in the present proceeding should not come in the way of landlord in the petition being filed by him after withdrawal of this petition. Learned counsel for the respondent-landlord is permitted to withdraw main eviction petition with liberty to file fresh petition against Sanjiv Kumar or against such persons who are tenant in possession as per the landlord. It is, however,made clear that any order made in the present proceedings shall not come into the way of the landlord while pursuing the subsequent petition being filed by landlord against the tenant. (ALOK SINGH) 21.09.2010 JUDGE reena