Civil Revision No. 2536 of 2010 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2536 of 2010 Date of decision: 21.4.2010 Shamsher Singh ...Petitioner Versus Manohar Lal ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. H.N.Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. S.D.ANAND, J. It is beyond the pale of controversy that the petitioner- tenant was ordained, vide order dated 23.1.2009, to pay up the arrears of rent qua the tenanted premises within one month from the date thereof. It was made clear, vide the impugned order, that in case the petitioner-judgment debtor does not pay up within one month from the date of grant of that order, he shall be liable to be ejected from the tenanted premises. The petitioner-tenant raised a plea before the learned Rent Controller that he did contact the respondent-landlord during that period of one month to accept rent but that he did not oblige by accepting the payment from him. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner-tenant that the petitioner served a legal notice upon the respondent, though after one month stipulated period was over. The law on the point was Civil Revision No. 2536 of 2010 -2- **** categorically 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 law on the point was authoritatively laid down by the Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan Vs. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corproation AIR 2002 SC 2004. That proposition of law came to be reiterated by this Court in a Division Bench Judgment dated 7.1.2010 in Civil Revision No.3577 of 2006 (Raj Kumar Vs. Rakesh Kumar). It can safely be culled out from the two judgments aforementioned that a tenant must comply with the order regarding the provisional rent assessment etc. in order evade the eviction. If that order is not complied with, ejectment action has to necessarily follow and that is what was precisely done by the learned Rent Controller and also learned Appellate Authority. In view, thus, of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan's case (supra) and also the view obtained by the Division Bench of this Court in Rajan alias Raj Kumar's case (supra) inescapable conclusion is that a tenant who does not comply with the order of provisional 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. April 21, 2010 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge