CR No.3193 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNAJB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.3193 of 2011 (O&M) Decided on 13.5.2011 Veena and another -- Petitioners vs. Geeta Devi --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. H.S.Dhandi,Advocate,for the petitioner RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J, (Oral) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 05..3.2011 passed by the Rent Controller, who has directed the petitioners to deposit arrears of rent with interest @ 6% per annum with a further direction to keep on depositing it for future months, while allowing the application for setting aside the ex-parte order of eviction. In brief, the landlord filed the eviction petition on the ground of non-payment of rent in which the petitioners were served, but thereafter, they chose not to appear, as a result of which, they were proceeded against exparte. CR No.3193 of 2011 (O&M) 2 The landlord led both oral as well as documentary evidence in support of her case which was accepted by the learned Rent Controller and ordered the eviction of the petitioners. After the ex- parte eviction order was passed, the tenants filed an application for setting aside of the exparte eviction order. The landlord filed execution before the Rent Controller/Civil Court. During the pendency of the execution application, the tenants filed an application for stay of his dispossession on which the landlord/decree holder made a statement that he would not mind for staying of the execution proceedings if the tenants deposit the arrears of rent due with interest @ 6% per annum and keep on depositing the future rent. On the statement of the learned counsel for the decree holder, the impugned order was passed and the application for staying the execution proceeding was accordingly disposed of. Learned counsel for the petitioners has accepted before this Court that they are neither owners nor tenants in the demised premises. They have encroached upon the demised premises and have also denied the relationship with the landlord. Therefore, they question the payment of arrears of rent. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, where the tenants chose not to contest the eviction petition despite their appearance and had filed an application before the Executing Court for staying the execution proceedings that the application for staying the CR No.3193 of 2011 (O&M) 3 exparte proceedings is pending, the Executing Court has committed no mistake in asking the tenants to deposit arrears of rent with 6% interest and further keep on depositing the same for future months in case they want their application for setting aside the exparte proceedings be considered. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed in limine. 13.5.2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) RR JUDGE