Civil Revision No. 4839 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Revision No. 4839 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.9.2010 Naveen Chander …Petitioner Versus Ved Parkash …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Puneet Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that eviction of the petitioner was ordered by the Rent Controller, Jalandhar, vide his order dated 7.9.2007, on the ground of personal necessity. However, the Appellate Authority, Jalandhar, vide his order dated 1.6.2009, has reversed this finding. Leaned counsel further submits that the Appellate Authority has not even discussed the fact as to whether the ground of personal necessity, as pleaded by the landlord, has been proved from the evidence adduced or not. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the order dated 4.2.2010 whereby a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had issued a notice holding that the impugned judgment, passed by the Appellate Authority, Jalandhar, is cryptic. Civil Revision No. 4839 of 2009 (O&M) 2 I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Without commenting upon the impugned judgment, passed by the Appellate Authority, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice will be fully served in case the matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority, with a direction to decide the appeal afresh noticing all the arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties. The parties shall appear before the Appellate Authority on 6.10.2010, which shall decide the appeal afresh within a period of one month thereafter. The records received form both the Courts below along with a copy of this order be sent to the Appellate Authority, forthwith. With the observations made above, the present revision petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge September 17, 2010 “DK”