IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.5971 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.11.2011 Ispak Ahmed son of Sh. Ahmed Khan ......Petitioner(s) Versus Mrs. Sushma Gupta and anr. ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Rohit Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) This is tenant's revision petition challenging the impugned orders of eviction dated 1.2.2011 and 12.5.2011 passed against him by the Authorities below on the ground that the landlords require the demised premises for their personal bona fide need. This Court on 28.9.2011 passed the following order: “Present: Mr. Rohit Ahuja, Advocate. “There is concurrent finding of fact that the landlord require the premises for personal necessity and there is no ground for interfering in that finding. Notice of motion to the extent to grant time to the petitioner for vacating the premises for 11.11.2011.” On 11.11.2011, the following order was passed by this Court: “Present: Mr. Satbir Rathore, Advocate for Mr. Rohit Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Sanjeev Roy, Advocate for Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the respondents. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents CR No.5971 of 2011 (O&M) -2- states that possession of the demised premises has been handed over to the respondents- landlord. List on 14.11.2011. To be shown in the urgent list.” Today, Sh. Rohit Ahuja, Advocate, has admitted before this Court that possession of demised premises has been taken over by the- landlord-respondents. However, his contention is that the same is taken by force. Mr. Ahuja, has very fairly stated that no police complaint has been lodged in this regard. In view of the order dated 28.9.2011 of this Court and the fact that possession of demised premises has already been handed over to the respondent-landlord, this petition does not survive. Dismissed. November 14, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE