IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.729 of 2008 Date of decision: February 06, 2008. Sudhir Kumar Mittal ...Petitioner(s) v. Oudh Narain Pathak ...Respondent(s) 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. Present: Shri Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate, with Shri Sham Lal, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - The petitioner is aggrieved at the order dated January 17, 2008 whereby he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,91,852/- towards arrears of provisional rent assessed by the Rent Controller. The petitioner is a tenant under the respondent at the agreed rate of rent of Rs.1800/- per month. In the ejectment petition, while the respondent has claimed that the petitioner is in arrears of rent with effect from 1.10.2000, the petitioner's contention is that the rent upto March 2007 has already been paid. The petitioner has relied upon his income tax returns in support of the said contention. Whether the petitioner has paid rent upto March 2007 or not is a disputed question of fact which the Rent Controller would be able to decide after evidence is led by both the parties. I am, therefore, of the considered view that no serious prejudice would be caused to the petitioner by directing him to pay arrears of rent with effect from 1.10.2000 on provisional basis, inasmuch as, if the petitioner succeeds in proving that the rent upto March 2007 has already been paid, in that event, the excess rent tendered by him in terms of the impugned order, would obviously be liable to be adjusted against the future rent. With these observations, disposed of. February 06, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge