C.R.No. 3633 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No. 3633 of 2010 Date of Decision 05.05.2011 Gurmail Singh and others Petitioners. Versus M/S. Page-3 Restaurant SCO 10-11-12, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr Kanwaljit Singh,Sr. Advocate,with Ms. Manisha Dayal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Rajesh Sood, Advocate, for the respondent. *** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) The landlords have filed this Revision Petition against the order dated 23.4.2010 passed by Rent Controller, Chandigarh whereby the prayer made for the assessment of provisional rent has been declined. The petitioners are owners of S.C.O.No. 10-11-12, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh,(for short the demised premises) which is allegedly let out with structures, fixtures and fittings, including electrical installations for using it as a Restaurant in terms of a document stipulated as lease deed. However, the respondent denied it to be a tenant rather asserts that it is a licensee. C.R.No. 3633 of 2010 2 Consequently, vide order dated 23.12.2009, the Rent Controller did not assess the provisional rent and framed the issues for the purpose of determining the controversy. Civil Revision No. 2563 of 2010, filed against that order of the Rent Controller was disposed of vide order dated 21.4.2010 and the Rent Controller was directed to decide the said issue afresh by noticing the licence deed dated 28.11.2005. In view of said order, the learned Rent Controller passed the order on 23.4.2010. Learned counsel for the landlord has submitted that the tenant has not paid any rent so far which has accumulated over a sum of ` 25,00,000/-. On the other hand, learned counsel for the tenant has submitted that it all depends upon interpretation of the document in dispute as to whether it is a license deed or a lease deed. It is conceded by learned counsel for the petitioners that it is a question of fact, which is yet to be decided on appreciation of evidence by the Rent Controller thus, both the parties have agreed that issue no.1 would cover the controversy as to whether the respondent is a licensee or a leasee. At present, both the parties are ad-idem that the revision petition may be disposed of with a direction to the Rent Controller to decide the eviction petition expeditiously and in the meantime, the tenant would furnish a bank guarantee with regard to the amount of rent due which is to be paid by the respondent along with 6% interest. Hence, it is directed that the tenant shall furnish the said bank guarantee, within one month from the date of passing of C.R.No. 3633 of 2010 3 this order and the Ld. Rent Controller, Chandigarh shall decide the eviction petition pending between the parties as early as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 05.05.2011 JUDGE Anoop