IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision 6718 of 2007. Date of Decision: 22nd February, 2008. Kartar Singh ....Petitioner through Mr. Vikram Aggarwal, Advocate Versus Kartar Chand ...Respondent through Mr. L.M.Gulati, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT,J.(ORAL) The respondent claims himself to be the landlord of the petitioner. He filed an ejectment petition against the petitioner on two grounds including non-payment of rent. The ejectment petition was allowed ex-parte. The petitioner has now filed an application to set aside the ex-parte proceedings. He has also moved an application to stay execution of the ex-parte eviction order. The said application has been allowed by the learned Rent Controller, subject to the condition that the petitioner “will deposit the rent due in that petition from 14.6.2003 till the filing of the petition along with interest @6% per annum”. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this revision petition primarily on the ground that since he is disputing the relationship of landlord and tenant, he can not be asked to deposit the alleged arrears of rent. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that no interference in the impugned order is called for. However, tender of arrears of rent by the petitioner shall cause no prejudice to his plea that there exists no relationship of landlord and tenant. Since the period within which the Rent Controller directed to deposit the arrears of rent has already expired, the petitioner is granted fifteen days' time from today to do the needful. Disposed of. February 22, 2008. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE