CR No.1615 of 2011 (O&M) -1- ***** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1615 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:09.03.2011. Prem Lata and others ...Petitioners Versus Ramesh Kumar Deora ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Gagandeep Singh Sirphikhi, Advocate, for the petitioners. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 23.02.2011 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Faridkot, by which the petitioners/tenants have been directed to deposit the rent @ `1,500/- per month during the pendency of the appeal. In brief, the respondent/landlord filed an ejectment petition against the petitioners/tenants on the ground of non-payment of rent which was alleged to be `2,000/- per month, whereas according to the petitioners/tenants the rent was initially `500/- per month which was lateron enhanced to `650/- per month, but since it was not paid by them, therefore, ejectment order was passed. The petitioners/tenants did not deposit the rent at the time of filing the appeal because they alleged that they had already paid the rent @ `650/- per month but the landlord is insisting for the payment of rent @ `2,000/- per month, whereas their appeal against the order of the learned Rent Controller is still to be decided. The present revision petition has been filed on the ground that the word used by the Appellate Authority as “fair rent” is illegal. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the available record. It is now well settled that after the eviction order is passed, the relationship of the landlord and tenant comes to an end and by virtue of filing the CR No.1615 of 2011 (O&M) -2- ***** appeal the tenants keep on enjoying the possession of the tenanted premises. In this case, the learned Appellate Authority has only asked the tenants for depositing the rent @ `1,500/- per month, though it has been decided by the learned Rent Controller to be `2,000/- per month. Thus, I do not find any error in the order of the learned Court below and as such, the present revision petition is hereby dismissed in limine. No costs. March 09, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE