Full Text
Date of
JUDGMENT
SMT. HARCHARAN KAUR, ………..Petitioner
Through: Mr. J.C. Mahindro, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Rajender Dutt, Advocate.
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)
1 Arguments had been addressed at length; learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the sale deed Ex. AW-1/1 clearly evidenced the fact that Harcharan Kaur had purchased this property; contention is that the FIR which had been registered at the behest of the complainant pursuant to which challan had been filed against Harcharan Kaur and others i.e. FIR 2011:DHC:4869 CM (M) No.1417/2005 No. 15/2001 under Sections 420/465/467/468/471/120-B IPC has also now been disposed of by a decision of 16.08.2008 of the competent Court at Amritsar; all the accused persons including Harcharan Kaur have since been acquitted and this is a well reasoned judgment. Copy of this Judgment had been placed on record. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the judgment of the Criminal Court is not binding upon the Civil Court and no cognizance can be taken of the facts which have been detailed in the said order.
2 Be that as it may, after some arguments with the consent of counsel for both the parties, it has been agreed upon that this is a fit case where the matter be remanded back to the RCT who shall on the basis of evidence already available before the Court reexamine the evidence and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the eviction petition of the landlord.
INDERMEET KAUR, J. SEPTEMBER 21, 2011 a