E-Paper
SC seeks report from rent controller in Gurugram over tenant’s eviction order
There was a long standing dispute over payment of rent arrears and the petitioner had approached the top court against an order of December 8 passed by HC dismissing the Foundation’s petition
The Supreme Court has sought a report from the Punjab & Haryana high court on the action by a rent controller in Gurugram, who passed an eviction order in a case listed before another judge without giving notice to the affected tenant.
“In our view, in a rent matter when the judge is on leave, passing an order by the In-charge judge on merits without notice prima facie is not tenable,” said a bench of justices JK Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi in an order passed on December 17.
The court directed the registrar general of the Punjab & Haryana high court to prepare a report by seeking explanation from the judge concerned and also from the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Gurugram district courts.
The court directed the report to be submitted before February 2.
“We direct that the Registrar General of the high court of Punjab and Haryana shall submit his report as to how and in what manner the recourse as followed is justified,” the order said, stating further, “The report would indicate the procedure required to be followed in case judges are on leave and to what extent, the orders can be passed by the In-charge Judge.”
Also Read: Ending the male monopoly in bar councils in India
The order was passed in a petition filed by one Anjali Foundation, the tenant in the premises owned by one Anil Mehra. There was a long standing dispute over payment of rent arrears and the petitioner had approached the top court against an order of December 8 passed by the high court dismissing the Foundation’s petition for fixing provisional rent as “infructuous”.
The high court held that since the rent controller had already passed an order of eviction on November 24, the issue of provisional rent had no relevance.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for the Foundation pointed out the circumstances in which the November 24 order came to be passed. He said that the eviction case was pending before Civil Judge, Junior Division Santosh who was on leave on that day and hence a date of January 17 came to be fixed in the matter for the next hearing.
On that same day, the matter was placed before the In-charge Judge Rent Controller Hari Kishan at the Gurugram court who passed an order directing eviction “ex-parte” without issuing notice to the Foundation or giving them an opportunity of hearing.
Although the Foundation agreed to vacate by February 28, 2026 and did not challenge the eviction order, Rohatgi said, “It is a matter of serious concern that one judge dealing with civil cases is on leave, Only in urgent cases, the In-charge judge can pass an order granting interim protection. How did the in-charge judge assume jurisdiction in this matter, and that too without notice. It speaks volumes about the procedure followed by the courts in the state of Haryana.”
He further pointed out that the Civil Judge had on November 6 passed an order fixing provisional rent and the matter was proceeding smoothly with the rent being paid at regular intervals.
The bench said, “Although the petitioner agreed to vacate the premises, the fact remains regarding propriety of functioning of the courts and of following the procedure… Registrar General is at liberty to ask for explanations from the judges concerned or from the Principal District Judge/District and Sessions Judge, Gurugram.”
The court further directed the petitioner Foundation to file an undertaking before the Registrar General (Judicial) of the Punjab & Haryana HC within two weeks to vacate the premises in question before February 28.
