Civil Revision No. 6450 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Revision No. 6450 of 2010 Date of Decision: 6.10.2010 Vinay Kumar …Petitioner Versus Satish Kumar …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Kanwar Ashwani Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been filed by Vinay Kumar, who in earlier two rounds of litigation, before the Civil Court, has been held to be the tenant of the respondent/landlord. The plea raised by the respondent/landlord, in both the civil suits that the petitioner was a trespasser and not his tenant, was rejected and it was held that the petitioner is a tenant of the respondent/landlord. The landlord has accepted the verdict of the Civil Court and filed the eviction petition under Section 13A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as “1949 Act”) to seek eviction of the tenant from the demised premises as his retirement is due on 31.10.2010. Grievance has been made by the petitioner/tenant that having earlier pleaded in two civil suits that he is not a tenant, the landlord is now barred to raise such a plea. Thus, no relationship of landlord and Civil Revision No. 6450 of 2010 2 tenant is established. This fact is considered by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh. In para No.9 of the order dated 8.9.2010, the respondent/landlord has made reference to the findings recorded in the two civil suits and submitted that once the Civil Court gave a finding that there exists the relationship of landlord and tenant, the respondent/landlord was well within his rights to institute the eviction petition under Section13-A of the 1949 Act. The Rent Controller, in his order dated 8.9.2010, has observed as under:- “...After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties, I have gone through the case file carefully. In the present case so far as the question of ownership of the petitioner over the demised premises is concerned, that has not been disputed in any manner. So far as the question of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties is concerned, it is an admitted fact between the parties that Civil Courts have already given the findings as to the fact that the status of the present parties is that of landlord and tenant. Now none of the parties have pleaded that these judgments are under challenge. Meaning thereby there is no dispute as to the fact that respondent is not the tenant of the petitioner in the demised premises...” Second plea raised by the petitioner before the Rent Controller was that the certificate has not been given by the Head of the Department regarding the employment and retirement of the Civil Revision No. 6450 of 2010 3 respondent/landlord. This plea was also rejected by the Rent Controller by observing that the the original certificate dated 25.11.2009 has been issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Forests Department, Union Territory, Chandigarh, showing the date of retirement of the landlord as 31.10.2010 and he was employed as a Forester in the Forest and Wild Life Department, Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh. That being so, this Court cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is having five school going children, therefore, it will be difficult to disturb their academic session and sufficient time be granted to the petitioner to vacate the demised premises. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in case sufficient time is granted to the petitioner to make an alternative arrangement, he will not press the present revision petition. This Court accepts the alternative submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. As prayed, the present revision petition is hereby dismissed as not pressed. However, a period of three months, commencing from 1.11.2010, is granted to the petitioner/tenant to make an alternative arrangement subject to their furnishing an undertaking on or before the date enumerated above to the Court of Rent Controller, Chandigarh, that he will handover actual physical vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent/landlord. The undertaking will also state that Civil Revision No. 6450 of 2010 4 the rent due for following months shall be paid on or before 7th of each month. The entire arrears of rent, if any, shall be deposited in the Court of Rent Controller, Chandigarh, by the date as enumerated above. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge October 6, 2010 “DK”