CWP No. 861 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 861 of 2010 Date of decision February 1 , 2010 Subhash Singhal ....... Petitioner Versus The Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda and others ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Manjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. **** K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The writ petition challenges the order passed for alleged unauthorized occupation under the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973. Initially a lease had been granted for a period of three years from 1.3.2003 but no fresh lease had been executed between the parties. The additional ground urged was that the petitioner had also not paid the monthly rents. The petitioner had a grievance that the property had not been properly repaired and therefore there was no scope to do the business at the premises. In my view, non- payment of rent as a justification for the alleged non-repair of the premises by the landlord is no defence for the petitioner. The petitioner may have had an independent right for securing the repairs in the manner known to law and in an action for eviction after the period of tenancy when no fresh lease had been executed, the petitioner can have no remedy before this Court. In this case, he is unable to show that the order passed by the authorities are in any way contrary to law. No ground is urged, apart from stating that the repairs had not been effected and therefore he was unable to run the business and pay the rent. CWP No. 861 of 2010 2 2. The order passed by the authorities conform to law and there is no scope for intervention in the writ petition. 3. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 1 , 2010 archana