CR No.1244 of 2011 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. *** CR No.1244 of 2011 (O&M) Decided on 25.3.2011. Mohd.Nasir --Petitioner vs. Banwari Harjai --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.M.K.Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner Rakesh Kumar Jain,J: (Oral) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 21.1.2011 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Malerkotla, by which execution proceedings have been stayed till the decision of the application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (for short,'the CPC'). In brief, facts of the case are that the landlord /petitioner filed an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short,'the Act') against the tenant on the ground of non-payment of rent @ `16,000/- per month w.e.f. March,2008 till the filing of the eviction petition i.e.24.9.2008. In that petition, the tenant did not appear despite service, as a result of which CR No.1244 of 2011 (O&M) 2 he was proceeded against ex-parte on 18.11.2008 and was ultimately ordered to be evicted vide an ex-parte order dated 12.9.2009. Since the tenant was in arrears of rent which was not paid by him in the eviction petition, therefore, the landlord filed a suit for recovery of ` 3,20,408/- which included the principal amount and interest of `6080/-. In the suit, the tenant filed his written statement in which he admitted the relationship of landlord and tenant and the rate of rent @ `16,000/- per month. He further stated that he has paid the rent up to September 2009 but the landlord stopped receiving the rent since October,2009. He submitted that he is ready and willing to pay the remaining rent to the landlord. While the suit for recovery was pending, the tenant filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC for setting aside the ex- parte eviction order and simultaneously filed an application for staying the execution proceedings before the Civil Court/ Rent Controller, who was executing the eviction order. In the execution, the learned Civil Court-Rent Controller granted injunction on 21.1.2011 which is now being challenged by way of the present revision in which notice of motion was issued on 23.2.2011 and the respondent/tenant was ordered to be served through dasti, registered notices as well as through his counsel Mr.T.M.Khilji appearing for him before the Court below and is looking after his application filed for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings. On 15.3.2011, this Court recorded an order that “As per CR No.1244 of 2011 (O&M) 3 office report, notice issued to the respondent has been received back duly served but no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent, he is, therefore, proceeded against ex-parte”. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the respondent is not coming forward to contest this revision petition, yet he has got instructions from his client to make a statement for getting the exparte eviction order dated 12.9.2009 set aside in which an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC has been filed by the tenant provided the tenant deposits the rent @ `16,000/- per month w.e.f. October 2009 till March 2011 as the tenant has admitted in his written statement filed in the Civil Suit that he is liable to pay the rent @ `16,000/- per month after September,2009. He has submitted that let the amount of rent remain deposited in the Court or the tenant may be directed to deposit the same in a bank in the fixed deposit fetching maximum interest and the learned Rent Controller may be directed to decide the eviction petition in a time frame manner. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to be quite genuine. Hence, this revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Rent Controller to recall the order dated 21.1.2011 as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner subject to the deposit of entire arrears of rent by the tenant from September 2009 till March, CR No.1244 of 2011 (O&M) 4 2011, within one month from the date of passing of this order, which shall be brought to his notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner by serving upon him a registered notice. It is also made clear that if the arrears of rent is not deposited as ordered by this Court, then the stay granted in the execution petition shall cease to operate without any formal order. 25.03.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge