CR No. 4269 of 2010 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 4269 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:09.03.2011 Subhash Chander . . .Petitioner Versus Shri Harjit Singh alias Sukhdershan Singh and another . . . Respondents ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.M.L. Sarin, Sr. Advocate, with Ms.Hemani Sarin, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amar Vivek, Advocate, for the respondents. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) The present revision petition is filed by the tenant against the order of ejectment passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh dated 20.10.2007 on the ground of personal necessity, which remained intact before the Appellate Authority as well. Consequently the tenant filed CR No.6192 of 2008 in which landlord had filed CM No.2122-CII of 2009 for mesne profits. The said application was disposed of on 17.4.2009 with the following orders: “Without going into the merits of the contentions relating to what the property could fetch, I direct that the tenant shall pay an amount of Rs.21,000/- per month effective from April 2009 and shall continue to pay the same amount every month till the conclusion of the revision before this Court. The amount is provisional and shall have no bearing to the respective merits of the contention between the parties” CR No. 4269 of 2010 (O&M) - 2 - The Civil Revision, however, was adjourned for 13.7.2009 and was allowed on 19.04.2010 with the following order: “The learned counsel for the parties are not in position to dispute that the judgment recorded by the learned Appellate authority cannot be averred to be a judgment in the real sense. Through out the judgment, all that learned Appellate Authority has done was to notice the respective pleadings and presented stances of the parties. The judgment under challenge does not contain any discussion of the points under adjudication. In the light of foregoing discussion, the petition shall stand allowed. The parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to appear before the learned Appellate Authority or the successor of that Court on 3.5.2010, which shall decide the appeal within one week therefrom i.e. 3.5.2010. In the meantime, the provisionally assessed rent shall be paid by the tenant to the landlord subject to ultimate adjudication.” In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the case was taken by the Appellate Authority and appeal of the tenant was dismissed on 24.5.2010. The tenant then filed present revision petition in order to challenge both the orders of the learned Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority. At the very inception, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the learned Appellate Authority has not considered the direction of this Court contained in Order dated 19.4.2010 because para Nos.29 to 32 of the impugned order are verbatim reproduction of para Nos.15 to 18 of the earlier order passed by the Appellate Authority on 7.8.2008 about which this Court had observed that “the judgment under challenge does not contain any discussion of the point under adjudication”. Learned counsel for the respondent could not dispute the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard and has practically failed to defend the order of the Appellate Authority. CR No. 4269 of 2010 (O&M) - 3 - In view thereof, the present revision petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority is hereby set aside and the case is again remanded to the Appellate Authority to decide it after giving categoric finding on the issues involved by taking into consideration evidence led by both the parties. The parties are directed to appear before the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh on 31.3.2011, who is directed to decide the appeal as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of appearance of the parties before it. Before parting, learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that the petitioner has not paid the previous rent/mesne profit as ordered by this Court on 19.4.2010. A cheque of `2,00500/- is handed over today in Court to the counsel for the respondent which includes the provisional rent/mesne profit w.e.f. June 2010 to February 2011 calculated @ `21,000/- per month as determined vide order dated 17.4.2009, which comes to `1,89,000/- and @ `500/- per month from January 2007 to March 2009, which comes to `13,500/-. Although, the cheque is received by learned counsel for the respondent but he has reserved his right to claim mesne profit/provisional rent on the basis of averments made in the application as it has been ordered on 17.4.2009 that this arrangement of `21,000/- is made till the conclusion of the revision before this Court and the amount is provisional having no bearing to the respective merits of the contentions to be raised by the parties. With these observations, present revision petition is hereby allowed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) MARCH 09, 2011 JUDGE Vivek