IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.428 of 2009 Date of decision: 18.05.2009 Anil Aggarwal ...Petitioner versus M/s Efficient Financial Services Pvt. Ltd and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Ramesh Kumar Bamal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate for the respondents. ----- 2. Civil Revision No.773 of 2009 M/s Efficient Financial Services Pvt. Ltd ...Petitioner versus Anil Aggarwal and others ...Respondents Present: Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. ---- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? K.Kannan, J. 1. The above civil revisions are between the same parties and in respect of same subject matter. Both the landlord and the tenant assail the same order passed by the Rent Controller determining Civil Revision No.428 of 2009 - 2 - the provisional rent on 18.12.2008 at Rs.20,000/- per month w.e.f. 08.06.2006. The tenant's revision is contained in Civil Revision No.428 of 2009 and the landlord's revision is contained in Civil Revision No.733 of 2009. By consent of the respective counsel appearing for both the parties, the civil revisions are disposed of by common order. 2. The landlord's petition 9 of 2005 was to secure eviction on the grounds of sub letting and non-payment of rent in respective of property situated in Chandigarh. The contention of the landlord was that the rent was Rs.20,000/- under a Lease Agreement dated 22.01.2004. The tenant filed his objections denying the execution of the lease agreement and contending that Shri Avtar Singh who represented M/s Efficient Financial Services Private Limited had obtained signatures of the first respondent on blank papers under pressure and coercion and that a lease deed had been fabricated by using the blank papers with his signatures. The tenant's contention was that the rate of rent was only Rs.10,000/- and that the tenancy was oral. 3. Having regard to the rival contentions between the parties and considering the fact that the tenancy itself had not been denied and the status between the petitioner and respondent as respectively landlord and tenant before the Rent Controller, the Rent Controller passed an order on 18.12.2008 directing the tenant to pay @ Rs.20,000/- per month w.e.f. 08.06.2006 along with interest and cost of Rs.1,000/-. The Rent Controller, while directing the quantum of rent at RS.20,000/- was not merely accepting the contention of the landlord, for according to the landlord the rent was payable from 01.05.2004 itself and Civil Revision No.428 of 2009 - 3 - that it was liable for further increase to Rs.21,200/- from 01.01.2005 with further periodically increases every year. In a way the Rent Controller struck a mid-path in acting on a document which contained the signatures of the defendant that made reference to a rent at Rs.20,000/- but still without giving full effect to it by providing for periodical increases in rents, directed that Rs.20,000/- alone would be require to be paid from a date which even according to the tenant he had not been paying i.e. from 08.06.2006. The rent which the Court was assessing was after all the provisional and the time from when the rent was directed to be paid was also merely provisional based on the admissions of the tenant that rent was payable from 08.06.2006. 4. Under the facts and circumstances, the order of the Rent Controller was most just and there is no scope for interference in revision. At the time when notice was directed to be issued to the respondent in Civil Revision No.428 of 2009, this Court had directed the tenant to pay rent at Rs.10,000/- per month from the date mentioned in the order till further orders. In view of the fact that I have affirmed the order of the Rent Controller, the tenant shall become liable to pay as provisional rent a further sum of Rs.10,000/- from 08.06.2006 till date and shall continue to pay the same during the pendency of proceedings. The payment of the entire arrears shall be made on or before 30.06.2009. The date namely 29.01.2009 as fixed by the Rent Controller in the impugned order dated 18.12.2008 shall now be substituted as 30.06.2009. Any failure on the part of the tenant to deposit the rent shall have the consequences of non-payment at the first hearing and shall Civil Revision No.428 of 2009 - 4 - render the tenant for summary ejectment. Needless to state that if in the final adjudication, the Rent Controller finds that the rent agreed between the parties was only Rs.10,000/- as contended by the tenant, the landlord shall refund the excess amount received by him. If the rent is found to be in excess of Rs.20,000/- as contended by the landlord, the balance shall also be payable by the tenant and to survive the non-payment of rent as a ground, the Rent Controller shall give a further opportunity on its final determination to make up for the deficit within such time as it may grant. 5. The civil revisions are disposed of in the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 18.05.2009 sanjeev