C.R.No. 944 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No. 944 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision 09.05.2011 Amarjit Singh Petitioner versus Kishan Lal Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda,Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sajjal Kaushal, Advocate, for the respondent. *** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press his revision petition on merits, rather he prayed that he may be granted at least one year's time to vacate the demised premises to search an alternative suitable accommodation. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, submits that though the period sought is quite long but he would not mind if the same is granted. He further submits that the petitioner may be directed to furnish an undertaking before the Rent Controller to vacate the demised premises on the completion of the said period. In view thereof, this petition is dismissed as not pressed and the petitioner is granted one year's time to vacate the demised premises subject to condition that he would furnish an undertaking before the Rent Controller within thirty days of receipt of certified C.R.No. 944 of 2011 (O&M) 2 copy of this order and shall hand over vacant possession of the demised premises to the landlord on or before 9.5.2012 and shall keep on paying the rent. It is further made clear that in case of violation of the undertaking given to the Rent Controller, he would be liable under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 09.05.2011 JUDGE Anoop