IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.7198 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 23.11.2011 Devender Kumar ......Petitioner(s) Versus Deepak Sharma ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. R.M.Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) This is tenant's revision petition challenging the order dated 3.8.2010 of the Rent Controller, ordering eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises and that of the Appellate Authority dated 15.10.2011 dismissing his appeal against the aforesaid order. The respondent-landlord sought eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises on the ground of non-payment of rent for the period w.e.f. 1.1.2003 to 31.1.2007. Initially, the petitioner was proceeded against ex parte. However, the said ex parte order was set aside on his application. Thereafter, the Rent Controller vide order dated 3.1.2009 assessed the provisional rent of the demised premises. Admittedly, the provisional rent has not been paid. The petitioner has contested the ejectment petition on the ground that he has already paid the entire rent upto 31.1.2007. However, the petitioner failed to place on record any evidence before the Rent Controller to prove his assertion that he has paid the entire rent. In fact despite many opportunities, the petitioner failed to produce any evidence before the Rent Controller and his evidence was closed by order dated 9.6.2010. The aforesaid order was never challenged by the petitioner. Not only this, after the order of ejectment, before the Appellate Authority also, CR No.7198 of 2011(O&M) -2- the petitioner moved an application for leading additional evidence to allow him to place on record the photostat copies of his personal diary allegedly containing the entries of the payment of rent. However, the said prayer of the petitioner was also not accepted as the Appellate Authority found that no case was made out to lead additional evidence at the said stage, since the aforesaid fact of payment of alleged rent to the respondent-landlord was within his knowledge from the very beginning and it was his positive case that he had paid the entire rent upto date. Even before this Court, counsel for the petitioner was unable to challenge the findings of the Appellate Authority denying him the right to lead additional evidence. Further, it may also be relevant to notice that in case of non- payment of provisional assessed rent, the eviction order has to follow as a consequence. No other point was urged. Thus, I find no merit in this petition. Dismissed. November 23, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE