Court gets Rana Gurjit’s son to vacate rented house in Jalandhar
Brig Ranjit Singh Ghuman (retired), a resident of Panchkula, had filed a case in the court on August 28, 2015, claiming the ownership of the house where Rana Inder had been living as a tenant for the last 15 years. Ghuman had complained that Inder Partap was not vacating the house.punjab Updated: Jul 05, 2017 18:32 IST
The civil judge, senior division, Jalandhar, on Wednesday officially gave the possession of the Defence Colony house taken on rent by Rana Inder Partap Singh, son of power and irrigation minister Rana Gurjit Singh, to its owner, a retired army officer.
Brig Ranjit Singh Ghuman (retired), a resident of Panchkula, had filed a case in the court on August 28, 2015, claiming the ownership of the house where Rana Inder had been living as a tenant for the last 15 years. Ghuman had complained that Inder Partap was not vacating the house.
On March 10 this year, the court of Aashish Abrol, rent controller, Jalandhar, had directed Rana Inder to vacate the Defence Colony house within two months.
On June 6, the court asked Ghuman to take possession of the property from Rana Inder. The order read, “You are authorised to remove any person bound by decree who may refuse to vacate the same.”
Ghuman had complained that the house was leased out to Rana on a monthly rent of Rs 45,000. On July 20, 2015, he issued him a legal notice, asking him to vacate the house. The army officer said he issued this notice to Rana Inder, for he was to retire from service on September 30, 2015, and wanted to live in his own house. However, Rana Inder did not respond to the notice.
Later, Ghuman moved the court seeking possession of the house.
Rana Inder’s advocate Gurmohan Singh told the court that the petitioner was not a bona fide landlord and had not submitted any relevant certificate of retirement from service indicating the date of retirement. He said the respondent was a tenant in a portion of the house for more than last 15 years, and his rent stood paid up to date.
After hearing the arguments of both the sides, the court ruled, “Simply the fact that the rent agreement has not been registered as per the dictate of Section 4 of The Punjab Rent Act, 1995, the status of tenant still remains that of the tenant. The tenant cannot claim to have become immortal and owner in the absence of registration of rent agreement.”
When contacted, Rana Inder said, “I vacated the house and shifted to my Kapurthala residence last month itself.”
(In the earlier version of the copy house rent was incorrectly mentioned as Rs 4,500. It has been corrected)
First Published: Jul 05, 2017 18:01 IST