Civil Revision No. 7682 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Revision No. 7682 of 2009 Date of Decision: 3.8.2010 Prem Lata and Others …Petitioners Versus Gurmail Singh and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. D.D. Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Mukand Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1. None for respondents No.2 to 4. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Respondent No.1 Gurmail Singh filed a petition for ejectment of the petitioner/tenants. The Rent Controller, Bathinda, determined the provisional rent at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month w.e.f. 1.8.1995 to 13.9.2009. So far as the rate of rent is concerned, there is no dispute. However, the period, for which the rent is due, has been seriously disputed. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while issuing notice of motion on 22.12.2009, had passed the following order:- “Notice of motion for 15.02.2010. Meanwhile, subject to petitioner's Civil Revision No. 7682 of 2009 2 tendering the arrears of rent w.e.f. July, 2001 till the filing of the eviction petition within two months and further payment of arrears by the petitioners from July, 2004 till 31st December, 2009 within a period of four months thereafter, the operation of the impugned order dated 06.10.2009, shall remain stayed”. It is stated that in pursuance of the above order, the tenants have paid the arrears of rent for the period from July 2001 till 31.12.2009. Regarding the period from 1.8.1995 to June 2001, stand of the tenants is that the rent was paid to the earlier owner of the building and the landlord. This fact is not accepted by learned counsel for respondent No.1/landlord. Therefore, the parties are required to adduce their evidence as to whether the rent,for the said period, was paid or not. This question is kept open, for the Rent Controller, to determine, after appreciating the evidence, to be led by the parties. Therefore, it is ordered that the tenants shall deposit the provisional rent for the period from July 2001 till 13.9.2009. Mr. D.D. Bansal, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, submits that arrears of rent for this period has already been deposited. However, Mr. Gupta appearing for respondent No.1 submits that even the arrears of rent for this period was not deposited on the first date but after availing four opportunities. Mr.Gupta further submits that in view of the law propounded in Rakesh Wadhawan v. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation AIR Civil Revision No. 7682 of 2009 3 2002 Supreme Court 2004 and interpreted by a Division Bench of this Court in Rajan alias Raj Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (Civil Revision No. 3577 of 2006, decided on 7.1.2010), non deposit of the arrears of rent, on the very first date, is to result into eviction of the tenant. This Court will refrain to comment on this contention as the Rent Controller, on the basis of the evidence, will be in a better position to determine this question also. In view of the observations made above, the present revision petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge August 3, 2010 “DK”