Sunil Dutta vs Gurnam Singh

Sabina, J.—Respondent had filed a petition against the petitioner u/s 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for ejectment of the respondent from the demised premises. Learned Rent controller allowed the petition as the petitioner had failed to deposit the arrears of rent as determined by it. Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide judgment dated 30.10.2013. I have learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

In the present case, admittedly, the Rent Controller had assessed the provisional rent @ Rs. 1,000/- per month vide order dated 26.3.2012. The said amount was not tendered by the petitioner on the first date of hearing along with interest and costs. In these circumstances, the courts below rightly relied upon the Civil Revision No. 46 of 2014 decision of the Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan and Others Vs. Jagdamba Industrial Corporation and Others, while ordering the eviction of the petitioner, wherein it was held as under:-

On the failure of the tenant to comply, nothing remains to be done and an order for eviction shall follow. If the tenant makes compliance, the inquiry shall continue for finally adjudicating upon the dispute as to the arrears of rent in the light of the contending pleas raised by the landlord and the tenant before the controller.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, no ground for interference by this Court is made out.

Dismissed.