Civil Revision No.2435 of 2008 (O&M) -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2435 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: July 29, 2009. Phoolwati ...Petitioner(s) v. Om Parkash ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for the respondent. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 12.10.2007 passed by the Appellate Authority, Karnal whereby the appeal preferred by the respondent-tenant has been accepted and the order of eviction dated 21.9.2005 passed by the Rent Controller, Karnal, has been set aside. The petitioner-landlady filed the present eviction petition primarily on the ground of non-payment of rent. She alleged that the respondent-tenant has not paid the rent for the period from 1.2.2000 to 31.12.2002. The respondent-tenant disputed his liability. The Rent Civil Revision No.2435 of 2008 (O&M) -: 2 :- Controller, having held that the respondent-tenant has failed to prove the payment of rent, who also did not tender the arrears of rent on the first effective date of hearing, passed an order of eviction on that count. The tenant preferred an appeal which has been allowed by the learned Appellate Authority on the ground that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rakesh Wadhawan v. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, 2002(1) RCR 514 (SC), it was imperative upon the Rent Controller to assess the total arrears of rent, interest and cost payable by the tenant and then pass a conditional order of eviction by giving him one opportunity to tender the same. Aggrieved, the petitioner-landlady has filed this revision petition. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, a learned counsel had put in appearance on 20.5.2009. No one, however, appears on behalf of the respondent-tenant today. Counsel for the petitioner informs that the counsel who had earlier appeared, has decided to appear for want of instructions from the respondent-tenant. The respondent is accordingly proceeded against ex-parte. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that even if the Appellate Authority was of the view that the tenant ought to have been granted an opportunity to tender the arrears of rent, after assessing the total arrears along with interest and cost, instead of allowing the appeal and dismissing the eviction petition, it ought to have remanded the case to the Rent Controller to give such an opportunity. Learned counsel further points out that till date the tenant has not paid the arrears or the future rent. Civil Revision No.2435 of 2008 (O&M) -: 3 :- Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the impugned order, I find merit in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that the matter ought to have been remanded to the Rent Controller so as to give an opportunity to the tenant to tender the arrears of rent, etc. to be assessed by the Rent Controller, failing which the order of eviction could be passed. For the reasons afore-stated, the revision petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 12.10.2007 passed by the Appellate Authority is modified to the extent that the matter is remanded to the Rent Controller, Karnal who shall assess the arrears of rent, interest and cost, as may be payable by the tenant and grant one opportunity to pay the same. In case the respondent-tenant fails to tender the same, there shall be an order of eviction against him. The parties are directed to appear before the Rent Controller on 25.9.2009. Dasti. July 29, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge