- (1.) This revision petition is filed by the landlord under Article 227. of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a direction to the Rent. Controller, Bathinda to pass order of eviction against the tenant in terms.of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Rakesh Wadhawan v. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, 2002 1 RCR(Rent) 514.
(2.) In brief, the landlord filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [for short "the Act"] in respect of the demised premises comprising of approximately 9826 Sq. ft. space, situated in Street No. 6, Nai Basti, Bathinda which was initially let out @ Rs. 39,000/- per month upto 31.08.2001 and thereafter, with the periodical increase of 10%, the present rate of rent is Rs. 57,099/- per month. The eviction has been sought on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent w.e.f. 01.12.2002 to 28.12.2005. The learned Rent Controller assessed the provisional rent on 07.04.2006 amounting to Rs. 15,73,931.85/- which was ordered to be paid on the next date of hearing, i.e. 21.04.2006. The tenant challenged the said order by way of CR-2169-2006 titled as 'Gurdarshan Singh Gill v. Chand Kumar Ahuja' which was dismissed on 21.04.2006. The operative part of the order reads as under : "The order of ejectment can be passed after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to the tenant as contemplated under Section 13(2) of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. It is so held in Civil Revision No. 3020 of 2003 titled as 'Rajinder Lal v. Gopal Krishan , 2006 1 RCR(Rent) 438 decided on 31.03.2006."
(3.) Since the Rent Controller had adjourned the case for 21.04.2006 for tender of rent but the CR-2169-2006 filed by the tenant was also decided by this Court on 21.04.2006 , therefore, learned counsel for the tenant made a request before the Rent Controller for extension of time. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned by the Rent Controller for 29.04.2006 for the same purpose. The order passed by the Rent Controller on 21.04.2006 reads as under : "An application for grant of adjournment to produce the order of Hon'ble High Court filed. The application is supported by an affidavit of the respondent. In view of the averments made in the application as well as affidavit, I deem it proper to wait for order of the Hon'ble High Court before proceeding further. Now to come up on 29.04.2006 for awaiting order from the Hon'ble High Court. The counsel for the respondent has also alleged in the application as well as in the affidavit and has made request also to the Court that the respondent wants to tender the rent. Tender proposed to be tendered today, is not in accordance with the order passed by this Court on 07.04.2006. The respondent will be allowed only to tender the rent after the receipt of the order of Hon'ble High Court.";