IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.7418 of 2010 Date of decision: 15th November, 2010 Amar Nath … Petitioner Versus Kashmir Singh Sandhu and another … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present revision petition has been filed assailing the order dated 27th October, 2010 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, wherein he assessed the provisional rent as Rs.90,000/- per month. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the rent agreement (Annexure P-2) to contend that even though the tenant was inducted at a rent of Rs.90,000/- per month, there was a specific clause in the rent agreement, which reads as under: “12. That at the expiry of the tenancy period on 31.03.2004, the tenant shall hand over the vacant possession of the said tenanted premises to the landlords. If the tenant fails to vacate the premises, the rent charged will be Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees One Lac Eighty Thousand Only) per month with an annual increase of 100% over the last rent paid.” Counsel for the petitioner has stated that due to non-vacation of the premises by the tenant after expiry of the lease period, the rent Civil Revision No.7418 of 2010 ought to have been assessed as Rs.1,80,000/-. The Rent Controller accepted the contention of the tenant that after expiry of the lease period, he became a statutory tenant and was to be governed by the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. This Court is of the opinion that the order assessing provisional rent is interim in nature. After the parties adduce their evidence, the real controversy can be adjudicated upon by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh and if it is found that the rent is on the lower side, any deficiency can be made good later. Hence, no interference is warranted in the present revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE November 15, 2010 rps 2