IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5060 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: October 13, 2011 Satish Kumar .. Petitioner Vs. Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and another .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. I.B. Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Lisa Gill, Advocate for the respondents. A.N. Jindal, J This petition has arisen out of the order dated 30.7.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Chandigarh, in an objection petition preferred against the arbitration Award dated 21.2.2003, vide which the evidence of the petitioner was closed by order. The facts in the background of the case, in nutshell, are that booth No.14 in sub-way, Sector 17/22, Chandigarh was leased out to the petitioner at a monthly rent of `12,500/- in an open auction held on 11.8.1997. The petitioner deposited `37,500/- as security equal to three months rent. The monthly rent was payable in advance by 10th day of the month on which it falls due. There was also provision with regard to enhancement of rent. The petitioner paid the rent only up to August, 1998 and thereafter, he on his own started paying the rent @ `10,500/- per month. Consequently, the respondent issued notice for ejectment and payment of arrears of rent. On failure to make payment, the lease of the petitioner was cancelled vide order dated 31.12.2002 by the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and ejectment proceedings were initiated. The petitioner filed a civil suit which is still pending. The arbitration proceedings were also initiated by the petitioner and the same were contested by the respondents and ultimately vide order dated 21.3.2003, arbitration Award was passed on the following terms :- Civil Revision No. 5060 of 2011 (O&M) -2- *** “...... In the circumstances, the petitioner is directed to clear upto-date arrears of rent within a period of 30 days reckonable from the issue of the award. The office of the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh is directed to supply the petitioner detailed account statement indicating the arrears of rent outstanding against him within a period of 7 days from the issue of this award. Since the petitioner has agreed for extension of lease with an increase of 50% in rent, therefore, Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh is directed to initiate necessary action for extension of lease for a further period of 5 years within an increase of 50% in rent as agreed by the petitioner. In case, the petitioner fails to clear the entire arrears of rent within the said period of 30 days, the impugned order dated 31.12.2002 shall become operative.” There is no denying a fact that the arrears of rent as agreed upon at the time of passing of the award have not been cleared. However, the petitioner has challenged the said award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before the learned District Judge, Chandigarh. The petitioner has been leading the evidence since long but the same could not be concluded, therefore, the trial court vide order dated 30.7.2011, closed the evidence by order. Actually, the petitioner appears to be dragging the case just to delay the ejectment as even after passing of the Award in the year 2003, on the basis of the consent given by the petitioner as well as his counsel, he neither complied with the terms of the Award nor has vacated the premises, but is still insisting upon to lead evidence in order to show that he was leased out the premises having lessor measurement, than it was promised at the time of auction. The factum with regard to lessor area, appears to have reached its logical end when the petitioner was brought to the notice that the area of the leased booth was correct. The relevant observations made by the Arbitrator in the award dated 21.3.2002, in this regard are reproduced as under :- Civil Revision No. 5060 of 2011 (O&M) -3- *** “4. During the course of proceedings a spot inspection was got conducted through Sh. Inder Gulati, Draftsman of the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh. The inspection report submitted by Sh. Gulati indicates that in case 50% of the area of the said walls and face wall is included then the area of the booth/shop comes to be 13'-3” x 8'-9” = 12.88 Sq. Yds. When it was brought to the knowledge of the petitioner and his counsel that the area of the booth is correct, if 50% of the area of the side walls and face wall is included. Thereafter, the petitioner as well as his counsel stated that they are ready to clear upto date arrears within a reasonable time. Both also submitted that they are also agreeable to an increase of 50% in rent after the expiry of lease period of 5 years.” In any case, the case is lingering on since 2003 and summary proceedings by way of execution before the learned District Judge have not so far been concluded even after passing of the eight years of the pendency of the petition. The trial court was right in providing no further opportunity to him. No merits. Dismissed. October 13, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge