Civil Revision No.7726 of 2010 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.7726 of 2010 Date of decision: November 26, 2010. Raj Kumar Jain ...Petitioner(s) v. Madan Gopal Diwan & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Shri N.S. Shekhawat, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia , J. (Oral): The present revision petition has been filed to assail the order dated 29.9.2010 (Annexure P-1), wherein it was recorded that the tenant had tendered the rent and case was adjourned for 8.10.2010 for filing written statement and providing TDS certificate to the petitioner-landlord. Counsel states that 29.9.2010 was fixed for tendering the amount of the rent along with TDS certificate. The tenant in compliance with the order of provisional assessment, had tendered an amount of Rs.2,93,445/-, against the total amount as assessed by the Rent Controller of Rs.3,40,646/- after deducting the amount of TDS of Rs.47,201/-. The Rent Controller adjourned the case to 29.9.2010 to permit tenant to furnish TDS certificates. It has been recorded by the Rent Controller on 8.10.2010 that the tenant furnished copy of the TDS certificate and the copy thereof was also supplied to the Counsel for the landlord. A grievance has been made in the present petitioner that TDS Civil Revision No.7726 of 2010 -: 2 :- certificate ought to have been filed on 29.9.2010, the date which was fixed for tendering the provisionally assessed rent. Counsel has further stated that a wrong order has been passed by the Rent Controller and the tenant had not furnished the TDS certificate. The order dated 8.10.2010 reveals that copy of the TDS certificate was supplied to the Counsel for the petitioner. That copy has not been made part of this petition. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that non-furnishing of the TDS certificate on the date which was fixed for tendering the provisionally assessed rent, makes the tender short and invalid, hence, in consonance with the observations of Hon'ble Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan v. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, 2002(1) RCR (Rent) 514 (SC), interpreted by a Division Bench of this Court in Rajan alias Raj Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar, 2010(1) Rent Control Reporter 386, the Rent Controller ought to have ordered eviction of the tenant. This argument cannot be entertained as after the amount of provisional rent was assessed, an opportunity was afforded by the Court to the tenant to furnish the TDS certificate which was later on furnished by the tenant on the date fixed. Hence, it cannot be said that the tender was short and invalid. The Court has the discretion to grant extension of time or postpone payment of the provisionally assessed rent, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case. The approach of the Rent Controller to adjourn the matter to enable the tenant to furnish the TDS certificate, suffers from no infirmity. Hence, no interference is warranted. The present petition is dismissed in limine. [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] November 26, 2010. Judge kadyan