CR No.1463 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - CR No.1464 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1465 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1466 of 2011 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CR No.1463 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.05.2011 Kulwant Singh . . .Petitioner Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others . . . Respondents ***** CR No.1464 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.05.2011 Rachhpal Singh . . .Petitioner Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others . . . Respondent ***** CR No.1465 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.05.2011 Anoop Kumar . . .Petitioner Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others . . . Respondent ***** CR No.1466 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.05.2011 Rachhpal Singh . . .Petitioner Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN CR No.1463 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - CR No.1464 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1465 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1466 of 2011 (O&M) ***** Present: Mr.Vikas Bahl, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amit Rawal, Advocate, for the respondents. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This order shall dispose of a batch of four cases, namely, CR No.1463 of 2011 titled as Kulwant Singh Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others, CR No.1464 of 2011 titled as Rachhpal Singh Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others, CR No.1465 of 2011 titled as Anoop Kumar Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others and CR No.1466 of 2011 titled as Rachhpal Singh Versus Anjana Devi Bhanot and others in which the shops are occupied by different tenants under the same landlord, who had filed separate petitions under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short ‘the Act’) for seeking their eviction on the ground of personal necessity. All the tenants had filed application under Section 18A(4) of the Act for the purpose of seeking leave to defend which were declined by the learned Rent Controller. All the aforesaid revision petitions have arisen out of the eviction petitions filed on different dates. In CR No. 1464 of 2011, eviction petition was filed against Rachhpal Singh on 7.12.2005 in which the landlord had alleged that he is possessing the passport issued by Great Britain. CR No.1466 of 2011, eviction petition was filed against Jugal Kishore on 24.4.2006 in which the same averment has been made whereas in CR No.1465 of 2011 and CR No.1463 of 2011, eviction petitions were filed against Anoop Kumar and Kulwant Singh respectively on 2.1.2007, in which it was alleged that the landlord is possessing the passport issued by the Government of India. Since the facts and circumstances of all the four cases are similar, therefore, for the purpose of convenience, facts are being extracted from CR No.1465 of 2011. CR No.1463 of 2011 (O&M) - 3 - CR No.1464 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1465 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1466 of 2011 (O&M) Admittedly, the Rent Controller has declined the application for grant of leave by his order dated 21.2.2009 which was challenged by the tenant before this Court by way of Civil Revision No.1351 of 2009 titled as Anoop Kumar Vs. Hoshiar Singh. The said revision petition was disposed of on 4.8.2010 with following observations: “After hearing learned counsel for the parties, impugned order dated 21.2.2009 whereby leave to contest has been upheld. The Rent Controller is, however, directed to decide as to whether the ingredients of Section 13-B of the Act are made out or not, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.” After the aforesaid order was passed by this Court, two applications were filed, one by the landlord for deciding the petition for ejectment in terms of the direction issued by the this Court and the other one was filed by the tenant for its dismissal. It appears that both the applications were taken up together by the learned Rent Controller and decided vide its order dated 3.12.2010 by which the application filed by the landlord has been allowed and that of the tenant is declined. The tenants have now come up in revision before this Court against the order of the Rent Controller. Mr.Vikas Bahl, learned counsel for the tenants has vehemently argued that in the impugned order, the ingredients of Section 13-B are still conspicuous by its absence and as such the direction issued by this Court vide order dated 4.8.2010 has not been followed in its letter and spirit. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that in view of the law declared by this Court by way of a Full Bench Judgment in CR No.1493 of 2010 titled as “Anwar Ali Versus Gian Kaur” decided on 9.11.2010, the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to proceed with the eviction petition after the leave to defend has been declined as eviction is an automatic consequence after the refusal of the grant of leave to defend. CR No.1463 of 2011 (O&M) - 4 - CR No.1464 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1465 of 2011 (O&M) CR No.1466 of 2011 (O&M) I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. It is now well settled by the Full Bench decision that the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to proceed with the eviction petition once application for leave to defend is declined. The direction issued by this Court earlier was perhaps in terms of the order passed in the case of “M.R.F. Limited and another Vs. S. Major Singh Purewal” 2009(1) RCR (Rent) 624, which has been impliedly overruled and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of “Kamal Raj Bansal Vs. Rajpaul Singh” 2008(4) RCR (Civil) 547 is also not followed in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of “Baldev Singh Bajwa Vs. Monish Saini” 2005(4) RCR (Civil) 492. Hence, the case of the tenant had to be closed down in view of the fact that the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to proceed with the trial after the application for leave to defend has been declined. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and as such all the revision petitions are hereby dismissed though without any order as to costs. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) MAY 23, 2011 JUDGE Vivek