CR No.3014 of 2010 CR No.3015 of 2010 CR No.4767 of 2010 CR No.4768 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.3014 of 2010 Date of Decision: 14.01.2011 M/s Rana Mohendra Papers Ltd. . . .Petitioner Versus Kanwar Narinder Singh . . . Respondent **** CR No.3015 of 2010 Date of Decision: 14.01.2011 M/s Rana Mohendra Papers Ltd. . . .Petitioner Versus Kanwar Narinder Singh . . . Respondent **** CR No.4767 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.01.2011 M/s Rana Mohendra Papers Ltd. . . .Petitioner Versus Kanwar Narinder Singh . . . Respondent **** CR No.4768 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.01.2011 M/s Rana Mohendra Papers Ltd. . . .Petitioner Versus Kanwar Narinder Singh . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Rahul Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Deepak Thapar, Advocate, for the respondent. ***** 1 CR No.3014 of 2010 CR No.3015 of 2010 CR No.4767 of 2010 CR No.4768 of 2010 RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This order shall dispose of four revision petitions namely, CR Nos. 3014, 3015, 4767 and 4768 of 2010 as common question of law is involved in these revision petitions. The petitioner, in all the aforesaid petitions, is a tenant, who was proceeded against ex parte before the Rent Controller and ultimately evicted from the demised premises. The petitioner filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the CPC’) for setting aside the ex parte order of the Rent Controller which was dismissed against which the present revision petitions have been filed. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the present revision petitions are not competent in view of Order 41 Rule 1(d) of the CPC which provides that against an order by which application for setting aside the ex parte order is dismissed, the appeal would lie and not the revision. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would file the appeal but some time may be granted to him and till then his dispossession in all four revision petitions may be stayed because in two cases namely, CR No.3014 & 3015 of 2010, dispossession of the petitioner was already stayed by this Court. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has no objection to the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner to this Court. In view thereof, all the revision petitions are hereby disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file appeal in accordance with law. Dispossession of the petitioner, in all the above cases, from the demised premises, remains stayed only for a period of two weeks’ from today. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected cases. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) January 14, 2011 JUDGE vivek 2