Civil Revision No.8166 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.8166 of 2010(O & M) Date of Decision:17.08.2011 Balak Ram ....petitioner Versus Tarlok Nath Sharma .....respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Anukur Soni, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondent *** RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.(ORAL): After arguing some time, when this Court was not agreeing with the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, he submits that he has instructions from the petitioner that if reasonable time is granted to him, he shall hand over the vacant possession of the premises in dispute to the respondent. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has submitted that any reasonable time, as considered by this Court, be granted to the petitioner to hand over the vacant possession of the premises in dispute to him, subject to his making payment of arrears of rent and advance rent up to the date of vacation and also subject to filing of an undertaking within one month from today, before the Rent Controller, Hoshiarpur, to the effect that he shall hand over the vacant possession to him on or before the stipulated date. Civil Revision No.8166 of 2010 2 Keeping in view the stand taken by the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is dismissed with the observations that the petitioner shall hand over the vacant possession of the demised premises on or before 29th February, 2012, subject to making the payment of arrears of rent, if any, within two months from today and also subject to the condition that he shall continue to make payment of the rent in advance i.e.10th of every month up to the date of the vacation. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before the Rent Controller, Hoshiarpur, within one month from today to the effect that he shall hand over the vacant possession to the respondent on or before 29th February, 2012. It is made clear that if the petitioner violates any of the conditions, as aforesaid, the impugned order shall come into operation, immediately. It is also clarified that in case the petitioner fails to hand over the vacant possession in terms of the undertaking made before the Rent Controller or the submissions made before this Court, the respondent shall be entitled to initiate the contempt proceedings, in addition to the execution of the impugned order. Disposed of. (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE 17.08.2011 neenu