CR No.3799 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - ***** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.3799 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:02.06.2011. Bhawani Singh ...Petitioner Versus Yatender Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Balraj Gujjar, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. The tenant is in revision against orders of the Courts below by which he has been ordered to vacate the demised premises. The landlord filed a petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 [for short “the Act”], inter alia, on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent. The learned Rent Controller, vide his order dated 05.08.2010, assessed the provisional rent of `39,514/- and directed the tenant to tender it on 20.08.2010. However, the tenant tendered only `17,000/- and asked for extension of time to tender the remaining amount. The amount tendered was received by the landlord under protest being short and prayed for passing an order of eviction. Accordingly, the learned Rent Controller passed the order of eviction which has been upheld in appeal. In this revision petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the learned Courts below have erred in not extending time for tendering the remaining amount as the tenant was not having the entire amount of rent on the due date as assessed by the learned Rent Controller, therefore, he had bona fide intention of tendering the rent on account of which the learned CR No.3799 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - ***** Rent Controller should have extended the time. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record from which I have found that the facts are not much in dispute, but the learned Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to extend the time for tendering the rent even if the tenant was unable to arrange the entire amount of rent on the due date. In view thereof, I do not find any error in the impugned orders of the Courts blow and as such, the revision petition is hereby dismissed in limine. No costs. June 02, 2011. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE