RAKESH KUMAR GARG J. - (1.) BY way of instant revision petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of order dated 11.11.2009 (Annexure P -4) to the extent of condition imposed by the Executing Court upon him to clear the arrears of rent pending against him during the pendency of the execution proceedings, order dated 28.09.2010 (Annexure P -5) vide which provisional rent at the rate of Rs.2500 p.m. has allegedly been assessed during the pendency of execution proceedings, order dated 23.10.2010 (Annexure P -6) issuing warrants of possession of the demised premises without taking any decision upon the application of the petitioner for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 22.05.2009 and order dated 15.06.2011 (Annexure P -10) vide which the application for modification of the aforesaid orders has been dismissed illegally.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the respondent filed an eviction petition against the petitioner seeking his eviction from the demised premises by alleging that the petitioner was inducted as a tenant at a monthly rent of Rs.3000/ - p.m. from May, 2006 and was in arrears of rent. Petitioner denied the relationship of landlord and tenant. The Rent Controller passed the following order on March 23, 2009: "Present: Counsel for the parties. Arguments on assessment of provisional rent heard. Perusal of pleadings of respondent, in his written statement in para No.2 reveals that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. This particular plea of the respondent clearly show that relations of landlord and tenant are denied by respondent as same are not admitted. In these circumstances, at this stage, provisional rent cannot be assessed. Now, to come upon 21.4.2009, the date already fixed for evidence of the petitioner".
(3.) THE petitioner was proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 21.04.2009. The Rent Controller passed an ex parte decree of eviction against him on 22.05.2009. As per the averments made in this petition, the petitioner came to know about the passing of the ex parte decree on 13.08.2009 when the Court Officials reached at the demised premises to execute the warrants of possession. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application dated 25.08.2009 (Annexure P -1) under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. with a prayer for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 22.05.2009 alongwith an application dated 25.08.2009 (Annexure P -2) for staying the execution proceedings. The Executing Court vide order dated 11.11.2009 (Annexure P -4) stayed the execution proceedings subject to the condition that petitioner will clear the entire arrears of rent pending against him. The relevant part of the order dated 11.11.2009 (Annexure P -4) reads as follows: "After hearing the rival contentions of both the counsels, I am of the considered view that the ex -parte decree was passed on 22.5.2009, in which the J.D. had appeared and even had filed written statement and when the issues were framed, the J.D. failed to appear and resultantly proceeded against ex -parte. The present application is moved by applicant/J.D. to delay the execution proceedings. From the above mentioned fact it is clear that J.D. had appeared in the main petition and subsequently, he was proceeded against ex -parte and ex -parte decree was passed against J.D./applicant, so under the given circumstances and in the interest of justice, this application moved by applicant/J.D. for staying the execution is allowed with the conditions that the JD/applicant will clear entire arrears of rent pending against him to the D.H. Therefore, the execution proceedings is stayed till the payment of entire arrears of rent, if the JD/applicant failed to clear entire arrears of rent then, the operation of execution proceedings against the J.D./applicant come in into force and the stay granted vide this order will be vacated automatically.";