Civil Revision No. 4645 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Revision No. 4645 of 2010 Date of Decision: 27.7.2010 Varinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus Mohant Hari Dass Chela Mahnat Balak Dass …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The petitioner was proceeded against ex parte before the Rent Controller, Amritsar. On filing of an application, the ex parte proceedings, initiated against him, were set aside and the petitioner was allowed to join the proceedings. Thereafter, the petitioner again absented himself and was proceeded against ex parte. He filed an application again for setting aside ex parte proceedings. He was permitted to join proceedings at that stage. Therefore, on record, neither there is any written statement nor cross-examination of the witnesses of the landlord. The petitioner also examined no witness. The petitioner has been continuing in the demised premises without paying any rent and is in arrears thereof since 1.8.1997. The trial Court held that the building in dispute, of which the tenanted premises is a part, has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation Civil Revision No. 4645 of 2010 2 and major portion thereof has already fallen down and the same is in dilapidated condition, on account of the demised premises being in unfit and unsafe condition, it was also held that the tenant is not permanently residing therein. It was further concluded that the portion, which is in possession of the tenant, is likely to fall at any time. Therefore, on this ground, the eviction was ordered by the Rent Controller, Amritsar, vide his judgment dated 21.10.2008. The petitioner has filed an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, an application was filed under Order 41 Rule 23 CPC and Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, raising a plea that regarding the ownership of the land, a dispute is pending between Mahant Hari Dass and Hem Raj. The said application was dismissed. The order passed thereupon was not challenged and had attained finality. Considering that no written statement was filed, the witnesses were not cross-examined and no evidence was led in defence, the Appellate Authority, Amritsar, affirmed the findings of the Rent Controller, Amritsar. Hence, this Court, in a revision, cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner and the present revision petition is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge July 27, 2010 “DK”