Satish Grover v. Shree Atmanand Jain Sabha and Another Shree Atmanand Jain
Case Details
(O&M) CR-6791-2025 (O&M) -1- - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- CR CR-6791-2025 (O&M) Decided on :- 24.09.2025 Decided on : Satish Grover ....Petitioner VERSUS Shree Atmanand Jain Sabha and Another Shree Atmanand Jain ....Respondent
Legal Reasoning
MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE M Present: Mr. Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajan Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner MANDEEP PANNU J. MANDEEP PANNU -.- 1. The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the learned Rent challenging the impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the learned Rent impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the learned Rent challenging the the Rent Controller directed the petitioner to file Controller, Bathinda, vide which the Rent Controller directed the petitioner to file the Rent Controller directed the petitioner to file Controller, Bathinda an affidavit/furnish information regarding the nature of M/s Indian Furniture Store an affidavit/furnish information regarding the nature of M/s Indian Furniture Store an affidavit/furnish information regarding the nature of M/s Indian Furniture Store an affidavit/furnish information regarding the nature of M/s Indian Furniture Store application filed by the petitioner under and his status as a partner therein, in an application filed by the petitioner under application filed by the petitioner under and his status as a partner Order 30 Rule 8 read with Section 151 CPC. Order 30 Rule 8 read with Section 151 CPC. Brief Facts 2. The brief facts, as borne out from the record, are that the respondents The brief facts, as borne out from the record, are that the respondents The brief facts, as borne out from the record, are that the respondents The brief facts, as borne out from the record, are that the respondents filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, seeking eviction of M/s Indian Furniture Store through its Restriction Act, 1949, seeking eviction of M/s Indian Furniture Store through its Restriction Act, 1949, seeking eviction of M/s Indian Furniture Store through its Restriction Act, 1949, seeking eviction of M/s Indian Furniture Store through its er, from the demised shop. The present petitioner alleged partner, Satish Grover, from the demised shop. The present petitioner er, from the demised shop. The present petitioner alleged partner, Satish Grov appeared and filed an application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC read with Section appeared and filed an application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC read with Section appeared and filed an application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC read with Section appeared and filed an application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC read with Section 151 CPC, praying that his appearance be treated as under protest, and the Court 151 CPC, praying that his appearance be treated as under protest, and the Court 151 CPC, praying that his appearance be treated as under protest, and the Court 151 CPC, praying that his appearance be treated as under protest, and the Court e Store is in fact a partnership must first determine whether M/s Indian Furniture Store is in fact a partnership must first determine whether M/s Indian Furnitur must first determine whether M/s Indian Furnitur TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.24 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-6791-2025 (O&M) -2- - firm and whether the petitioner is a partner thereof, before proceeding further in firm and whether the petitioner is a partner thereof, before proceeding further in firm and whether the petitioner is a partner thereof, before proceeding further in firm and whether the petitioner is a partner thereof, before proceeding further in the eviction matter. the eviction matter. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner 3. CPC, It is the contention of the petitioner that as per Order 30 Rule 8 CPC, It is the contention of the petitioner that as per Order 30 Rule 8 It is the contention of the petitioner that as per Order 30 Rule 8 the Court is under a statutory obligation to first decide the objection regarding the the Court is under a statutory obligation to first decide the objection regarding the the Court is under a statutory obligation to first decide the objection regarding the the Court is under a statutory obligation to first decide the objection regarding the partnership and the liability of the alleged partner, and until such determination is partnership and the liability of the alleged partner, and until such determination is partnership and the liability of the alleged partner, and until such determination is partnership and the liability of the alleged partner, and until such determination is made, no direction for furnishing information or affidavit can be issued against made, no direction for furnishing information or affidavit can be issued again made, no direction for furnishing information or affidavit can be issued again made, no direction for furnishing information or affidavit can be issued again him. The learned Rent Controller, however, vide the impugned order, directed the him. The learned Rent Controller, however, vide the impugned order, directed the him. The learned Rent Controller, however, vide the impugned order, directed the him. The learned Rent Controller, however, vide the impugned order, directed the petitioner to furnish affidavit disclosing details of partnership, period of petitioner to furnish affidavit disclosing details of partnership, period of petitioner to furnish affidavit disclosing details of partnership, period of petitioner to furnish affidavit disclosing details of partnership, period of membership, and dissolution, if any, without first adjudicating upon the membership, and dissolution, if any, without first adjudicating upon the membership, and dissolution, if any, without first adjudicating upon the membership, and dissolution, if any, without first adjudicating upon the application. Findings 4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. and perused the record. 5. makes it clear that where a person is A plain reading of Rule 8 CPC makes it clear that where a person is makes it clear that where a person is A plain reading of Rule 8 summoned as a partner but denies such status, he is entitled to enter appearance summoned as a partner but denies such status, he is entitled to enter appearance summoned as a partner but denies such status, he is entitled to enter appearance summoned as a partner but denies such status, he is entitled to enter appearance der protest. Thereafter, it is incumbent upon the Court to determine the question under protest. Thereafter, it is incumbent upon the Court to determine the question der protest. Thereafter, it is incumbent upon the Court to determine the question der protest. Thereafter, it is incumbent upon the Court to determine the question whether that person was in fact a partner of the firm and liable as such. Only upon whether that person was in fact a partner of the firm and liable as such. Only upon whether that person was in fact a partner of the firm and liable as such. Only upon whether that person was in fact a partner of the firm and liable as such. Only upon such determination can further proceedings in the main case take place. such determination can further proceedings in the main case take place. such determination can further proceedings in the main case take place. 6. Rule 8 CPC, therefore, envisages a preliminary The scheme of Rule 8 CPC, therefore, envisages a preliminary Rule 8 CPC, therefore, envisages a preliminary The scheme of adjudication. The liability of the alleged partner cannot be presumed nor can he be adjudication. The liability of the alleged partner cannot be presumed nor can he be adjudication. The liability of the alleged partner cannot be presumed nor can he be adjudication. The liability of the alleged partner cannot be presumed nor can he be compelled to furnish details of partnership unless and until the Court decides the compelled to furnish details of partnership unless and until the Court decides the compelled to furnish details of partnership unless and until the Court decides the compelled to furnish details of partnership unless and until the Court decides the application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC. The application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC. The object is to protect a person who object is to protect a person who disputes being a partner from being unnecessarily entangled in litigation or made disputes being a partner from being unnecessarily entangled in litigation or made disputes being a partner from being unnecessarily entangled in litigation or made disputes being a partner from being unnecessarily entangled in litigation or made liable for acts of a firm of which he is not a member. liable for acts of a firm of which he is not a member. liable for acts of a firm of which he is not a member. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.24 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-6791-2025 (O&M) -3- - 7. In the present case, instead of deciding the application filed by the In the present case, instead of deciding the application filed by the In the present case, instead of deciding the application filed by the In the present case, instead of deciding the application filed by the petitioner, the learned Rent Controller called upon him to disclose on affidavit the petitioner, the learned Rent Controller called upon him to disclose on affidavit the petitioner, the learned Rent Controller called upon him to disclose on affidavit the petitioner, the learned Rent Controller called upon him to disclose on affidavit the very facts which were in dispute. Such a course virtually compels the petitioner to very facts which were in dispute. Such a course virtually compels the petitioner to very facts which were in dispute. Such a course virtually compels the petitioner to very facts which were in dispute. Such a course virtually compels the petitioner to admit or deny partnership on oath before his objection under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC admit or deny partnership on oath before his objection under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC admit or deny partnership on oath before his objection under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC admit or deny partnership on oath before his objection under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC ermined. This approach is contrary to the scheme of the Code. is determined. This approach is contrary to the scheme of the Code. ermined. This approach is contrary to the scheme of the Code. Conclusion 8. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Rent In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Rent In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Rent In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Rent Controller was not Controller was not Controller was not Controller was not justified justified justified justified in directing in directing in directing in directing the petitioner the petitioner the petitioner the petitioner to to to to file an file an file an file an lication under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC. affidavit/information without deciding the application under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC. lication under Order 30 Rule 8 CPC. affidavit/information without deciding the app The impugned order dated 22.08.2025 is, therefore, set aside. The impugned order dated 22.08.2025 is, therefore, set aside. The impugned order dated 22.08.2025 is, therefore, set aside. 9. to first decide the The Rent Controller, Bathinda, is directed to first decide the The Rent Controller, Bathinda, is directed The Rent Controller, Bathinda, is directed application filed by the petitioner under Order 30 Rule 8 read with Section 151 application filed by the petitioner under Order 30 Rule 8 read with Section 151 application filed by the petitioner under Order 30 Rule 8 read with Section 151 application filed by the petitioner under Order 30 Rule 8 read with Section 151 ordance with law, and only thereafter proceed with the eviction CPC, in accordance with law, and only thereafter proceed with the eviction ordance with law, and only thereafter proceed with the eviction ordance with law, and only thereafter proceed with the eviction petition. 10. 11. civil revision is accordingly allowed. The present civil revision is accordingly allowed. The
Decision
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 2025 September 24, 2025 tripti (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non : Yes/No : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.24 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document