Civil Revision No. 2689 of 2010 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2689 of 2010 Date of decision: 10.5.2010 Smt. Ravinder Kaur ...Petitioner Versus Harban Singh and another ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate for the petitioner. S.D.ANAND, J. The following factual scenario is apparent from the affidavit- supported averments made in the course of petition. Provisional rent (interest and costs etc. ) came to be assessed on 1.11.2008 and the matter was adjourned to the next date of hearing for tender i.e. 10.12.2008. The tender was not made. Instead thereof , the counsel for the tenant filed a plea for re-assessment of the provisional rent and the matter was adjourned to 23.12.2008. On that date, the counsel for the petitioner- landlord filed a reply to the application and, along therewith, also filed a plea for grant of an ejectment order forthwith in view of the fact that provisional assessed rent had not been paid. The matter was adjourned to 6.1.2009 for filing of the reply by the tenant. No reply came to be filed on 6.1.2009. It was, ultimately, filed on 9.1.2009. The matter was adjourned to 15.1.2009. On 15.1.2009, the respondent-tenant filed a plea under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. for amendment of the pleadings and the matter was adjourned to 20.1.2009. On that date, the matter was adjourned to 26.1.2009. Civil Revision No. 2689 of 2010 -2- **** It is argued that the non-disposal of the matter is violative of law laid down by the Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan Vs. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corproation AIR 2002 SC 2004 and a Division Bench judgment dated 7.1.2010 passed in Civil Revision No.3577 of 2006 (Rajan alias Raj Kumar Vs. Rakesh Kumar). The learned counsel for the petitioner says that he would be content and interests of justice would be served if a time-bound disposal of two aforementioned pending applications is ordered by this Court. The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly with a direction to learned Rent Controller to dispose of the two pending applications on the next date of hearing i.e. 28.5.2010. The petitioner, through his learned counsel, is directed to appear before the learned Rent Controller on the date fixed. It will be for the learned Rent Controller to secure the presence of the opposite party for that date by issuance of a notice. The disposal of this petition in limine proceeds on an assumption that there is no factual inaccuracy in the averment on behalf of the petitioner. If it transpires, at any subsequent point of time, that this order had been obtained on the basis of any incorrect averment, it (order of this Court) would be liable to be reviewed. The acknowledgment (of a copy of this order) issued by the concerned Judicial Officer shall be forwarded to the Registry of this Court. Learned Sessions Judge shall himself maintain a tab to ensure that the case is disposed of by afore-mentioned date. Disposed of accordingly. May 10, 2010 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge