Civil Revision No. 1752 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1752 of 2010 Date of decision : 25.3.2010 Gopal Sharma ....Petitioner Versus Sudesh Kumar ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Chaman Lal, Advocate for Mr. S.S.Salar, Advocate for the petitioner. S. D. ANAND, J. The eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the tenanted premises came to be ordered by the learned Rent Controller and affirmed by the learned Appellate Authority, on a finding that the order granted by the former for the tender of provisional assessed rent etc. was not complied with. The order was granted in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan Vs. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corproation AIR 2002 SC 2004. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, argued that the learned Rent Controller ought to have afforded yet another opportunity to the petitioner-tenant to pay up the arrears of rent. The plea raised is denuded of merit. It is apparent from the impugned order itself that ejectment had been applied for on an averment of non-payment of rent. The provisional rent etc. was assessed by the learned Rent Controller and the matter was Civil Revision No. 1752 of 2010 -2- adjourned for tender. The petitioner-tenant did not comply with the order passed by the learned Rent Controller in the context. In view, thus, of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan's case (supra) and also the view obtained by a Division Bench of this Court in Civil Revision No.3577 of 2006 (Raj Kumar Vs. Rakesh Kumar), the inescapable conclusion is that a tenant, who does not comply with the order of provisionally assessed rent, must face eviction. In the light of foregoing discussion, the petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. The petitioner- tenant shall have two months time from today to vacate the premises aforementioned. March 25, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE Civil Revision No. 1752 of 2010 -3-