IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 869 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: February 09, 2010 Ramesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus Lakha Singh … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present: Mr.Sandeep S. Majithia, Advocate, for the petitioner. S.D. Anand, J. It is apparent from the record that the petitioner herein did not pay up the provisionally assessed amount of rent etc. on the first date of hearing. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, states that the provisionally assessed amount of rent etc. could not be paid as the Bar was on strike, on account of internal fissures, on the relevant date. The Apex Court held in Rakesh Wadhawan Vs. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, AIR 2002 SC 2004 that the provisionally assessed rent must be compulsively paid up on the first date of hearing and a default in that behalf would entail unavoidable eviction. A similar view was taken by a C.R. 869 of 2010 Division Bench of this Court in Civil Revision No. 3577 of 2006. That was a case where the matter was referred to the Division Bench in view of “differing interpretations given by two Single Judges of this Court, to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported as Rakesh Wadhawan Vs. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation AIR 2002 SC 2004.” The Division Bench approved the view obtained by a Single Bench of this Court in Madan Lal and another vs. Baldev Raj, (2004-2) P.L.R. 834. The Division Bench did not subscribe to the view obtained by the Single Bench of this Court in Rajinder Lal vs. Gopal Krishan (2006-2), P.L.R. 124. The plea that the Bar was on strike on the first date of hearing and the petitioner herein could not make payment on account of it is neither here nor there in view of the categorical law laid down in Rakesh Wadhawan’s case (supra) and a Division Bench of this Court in Civil Revision No. 3577 of 2006. In the light thereof, the petition is devoid of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. February 9, 2010 (S.D.Anand) vkd Judge 2