In a significant ruling on tenant rights and procedural fairness, the Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that had upheld an eviction order against a tenant. The apex court held that when court summons are not properly served, a tenant cannot be denied the chance to defend the case on technical grounds.
The judgment was delivered on January 6, 2026, in a civil appeal arising out of a rent dispute from Chandigarh.
Read also:- Rajasthan HC Rules RTE Quota Applies at Pre-School Level, Strikes Down State’s Restricted Entry Policy
Background of the Case
The dispute began when landlord Parneet Singh Sohi filed a rent petition against tenant Harpreet Singh before the Rent Controller, Chandigarh. The landlord sought eviction from the demised premises.
In February 2024, the Rent Controller allowed the eviction plea after rejecting the tenant’s application for leave to defend. The rejection was based on delay, as the tenant had filed the application beyond the prescribed time limit.
Challenging this, the tenant approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court. However, in April 2025, the High Court dismissed the revision petition and upheld the Rent Controller’s order.
Left with no relief, the tenant moved the Supreme Court.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Bihar Rule Requiring Pharmacy Diploma for Govt Jobs, Rejects Degree-Only Claims
What the Supreme Court Examined
The Supreme Court bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar closely examined the sequence of events.
A crucial fact emerged during the hearing - the summons were never served on the tenant in the first place.
Despite this, the tenant later appeared through counsel, sought copies of documents, and then filed an application for leave to defend along with a plea to condone the delay.
The Rent Controller, however, rejected the plea solely on limitation, without examining the merits of the tenant’s defence.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court found the situation unusual and legally significant.
“The bench observed that in a case where summons were admittedly not served, the tenant’s request to defend the matter could not have been rejected only on technical grounds,” the order noted.
The court emphasised that procedural rules should not override substantive justice, especially when the party was not properly informed of the proceedings.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Bihar Rule Requiring Pharmacy Diploma for Govt Jobs, Rejects Degree-Only Claims
It further noted that the tenant had approached the court soon after gaining knowledge of the case and had shown intent to contest the eviction.
Decision of the Court
Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order and remitted the matter back to the Rent Controller, Chandigarh.
The Rent Controller has now been directed to:
- Consider the tenant’s application for leave to defend on merits
- Decide the matter expeditiously, preferably within one month
- Hear both parties afresh without being influenced by earlier findings
The court clarified:
“We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the prayer seeking leave to defend. All contentions are left open.”
Both parties have been directed to appear before the Rent Controller on January 23, 2026.
With this, the civil appeal was disposed of.
Case Title: Harpreet Singh v. Parneet Singh Sohi
Case No.: Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 14128 of 2025
Decision Date: 6 January 2026
