CR No.7290 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.7290 of 2011 Date of decision: 28.11.2011 Kulwant Singh Saini ......Petitioner(s) Versus M/s. Blue Diamond Embroidery ......Respondent(s) CR No.7291 of 2011 Kulwant Singh Saini ......Petitioner(s) Versus Nipun Sharma ......Respondent(s) CR No.7295 of 2011 Kulwant Singh Saini ......Petitioner(s) Versus Manjit Singh ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar Mutneja, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. This order shall dispose of three revision petitions i.e. CR No.7290, 7291, 7295 of 2011 which have been filed by the landlord, wherein, he is seeking directions to the Rent Controller to dispose of the rent petitions filed on 16.8.2010 for eviction of the respondent tenant, in a fixed time schedule. As per averments, frequent adjournments granted by the Rent Controller have resulted into an inherent gain and incentive to the respondent-tenant, who is adopting dilatory tactics to delay the eviction CR No.7290 of 2011 2 proceedings. It has been further averred that the petitioner is a senior citizen, aged 75 years, and is surviving on the pension and the rental income and he has been constraint to approach this Court as in the petition filed for eviction of the respondents on the ground of non-payment of rent, till date, even provisional rent has not been assessed, which has caused great injustice to him; whereas the respondent is gaining undue benefit for not paying the rent. Thus, the following directions have been sought in these petitions: “(i) Allow the present petition by directing the learned Rent Controller, Amritsar, to decide the petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, for the eviction of respondent from the demised premises on the ground of non-payment of rent, in a fixed time schedule and also to exercise its discretion in granting adjournments in a judicious manner. (ii) Direct the learned Rent Controller to expeditiously assess the exact amount of arrears of rent, interest accrued thereon and cost of the petition as provisional rent payable by the respondent.” I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the averments made in these revision petitions and the various zimni orders of the Rent Controller as mentioned in these petitions. A perusal of the various zimni orders would show that at no stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the Rent Controller, has objected to any adjournment. Even otherwise, a perusal of the various zimni orders would show that till date, no unnecessary adjournment has been granted. The petitioner had filed replication on 19.11.2011 and thereafter, the matter has been fixed for consideration for 2.12.2011 and in between the instant revision petition has CR No.7290 of 2011 3 been filed seeking directions as aforesaid. Thus, no case is made out for giving any direction to dispose of the case in a time bound frame. Even otherwise, this Court on the administrative side has already issued various instructions with regard to disposal of the cases. No violation of any such instructions have been brought to the notice of this Court. Thus, I find no merit in these revision petitions. Dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases. November 28, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE