IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.3461 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:24.05.2011. Ambuj Chauhan ...Petitioner Versus M/s Brar Estates Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. The tenant is in revision against orders of the Courts below by which he has been ordered to vacate Booth No.100, Sector 38-C&D, Chandigarh in which he was inducted on 09.02.2004. The landlord filed petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [for short “the Act”], inter alia, on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent. After completion of the pleadings, the learned Rent Controller assessed the provisional rent amounting to `1,62,460/- on 26.11.2010 which was ordered to be tendered on 09.02.2011. However, on the said date, the rent was not tendered, rather time was sought to be extended, but the learned Courts below did not allow extension of time on the ground that it is not permissible and while relying upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Rajan @ Raj Kumar V. Rakesh Kumar, 2010(1) RCR (Rent) 386, ordered eviction of the tenant. In this revision petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has only made a prayer for extension of time to tender the rent as ordered on 26.11.2010. I am afraid that such type of prayer cannot be accepted. Nothing more has been argued. In view of the above, the present revision petition is found to be without any merit and as such the same is hereby dismissed in limine, however, without any order as to costs. May 24, 2011. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE