IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.5619 of 2008 Date of decision:20.04.2009 Mohinder Singh ...Petitioner versus Rajinder Kumar ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr.Binderjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ----- 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 ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The revision is against the order dismissing the petition for eviction filed at the instance of the landlord on the ground of non-payment of rent. The Rent Controller accepted the contention of the landlord and ordered eviction but the Appellate Authority reversed the finding by observing that the rent which had been determined between the parties was only Rs.400/- per month and that amount had been paid without any default. 2. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner vehemently argued that the reasoning of the Appellate Court is wrong and the decision of the Rent Controller ought not have been interfered with. However, on persistent enquiry from Court, learned counsel admits that the quantum of rent has been finally determined by this Court as C.R. No.5619 of 2008 - 2 - Rs.400/- and therefore, there was no short tender as canvassed by the Rent Controller. If the quantum of rent is accepted as Rs.400/-, the same having admittedly become final, nothing survive for the landlord to urge that there was a short tender. Under such circumstances, there is no scope for interference in the revision. 3. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 20.04.2009 sanjeev