R.S.Sarkaria, J. - (1.) THIS Civil Revision 29 of 1967 by the landlord is directed against an order, dated December 5, 1966, of the Appellate Authority, Sangrur. It arises out of the following circumstances:
(2.) MANGAT Rai, revision -Petitioner, leased out his shop, situated at Barnala, on an yearly rent of Rs. 800 by a rent -note, dated February 19, 1959, for a period of one year to Ved Parkash Respondent. The tenant made an application under Section 4 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, III of 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the Rent Controller for fixation of fair rent. The Rent Controller by his order, dated November 30, 1963, fixed the fair rent of the shop at Rs. 137.50 per annum. Against that order, the landlord preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority, which accepted the appeal on May 25, 1965, set aside the order of the Rent Controller and fixed the fair rent of the shop at Rs. 800 per annum. Against that order of the Appellate Authority, the tenant went in revision to the High Court. The revision -petition (No. 547 of 1965) first came up for hearing before the learned Vacation Judge (Narula, J.) on June 21, 1965, who passed the following order: Operation of the order fixing Rs. 800 per mensem as fair rent stayed pending hearing of C. R. by the Motion Bench. Prior to the making of this order, dated June 21, 1965, the landlord made a petition under Section 13 of the Act for ejectment of the tenant on the ground that he had failed to pay rent for the period September 18, 1962 to May 31, 1965, at the rate of Rs. 800 per annum. Summons was issued in that case to the tenant for appearance before the Rent Controller on July 2, 1965. The summons was duly served on the tenant. On July 2, 1965, the tenant appeared in person. In the meantime, copy of the stay order, dated June 21, 1965, of the High Court, together with a copy of the Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2258 of 1965 made by the tenant in the High Court for stay of the ejectment proceeding before the Rent Controller, was sent under covering letter No. 16411/Misc, dated June 21, 1965, of the High Court to the Rent Controller. Consequently, the Controller, on July 2, 1965, made this order: Proceedings are stayed by the High Court and in view of the High Court circular No. 164, dated 17th May, 1965, received in this Court on 24th June, 1965, no proceedings are to take place, so the case is adjourned to 7th August, 1965. On August 7, 1965, the Rent Controller recorded this order: Present: Counsel for the Petitioner and Ved Parkash Respondent in person. Proceedings are stayed by the High Court. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has stated that the proceedings are not stayed. He should apply to the High Court. Ved Parkash is also ordered to produce the order of the High Court as the stay order is regarding case No. 191. To come up on 14th September, 1965.
(3.) THEN , on subsequent dates, namely, September 14, 1965, and September 30, 1965, the Rent Controller did not take any proceedings. He simply said that the Respondent shall comply with the order, dated September 8, 1965, of the High Court. The case was first adjourned to October 11, 1965, and then to November 30, 1965. On these dates also, no proceedings were taken in the application for eviction made by the landlord. The case was then adjourned to December 13, 1965.;