Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: July 3, 2009. Satya Devi wife of Dharam Pal ...Petitioner(s) v. Ruldu Ram (Retired Head Lecturer) ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Bhanu Partap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioner-tenant is aggrieved at the orders dated 15.5.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Phul, whereby, firstly the petitioner has been declined leave to defend in a petition under Section 13-A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 and as a consequence thereto, he has been ordered to be evicted. [2]. The facts may be briefly noticed. [3]. The respondent-landlord retired on 31.7.2006 from the post of Head Lecturer, Government Elementary school, Dhaday, Tehsil Phul. He had inducted the petitioner as a tenant in the demised premises in the year 1992. He filed the present eviction petition, inter-alia, on the ground that Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 2 :- he does not own any other vacant premises in the local area of Rampura Phul and that he wants to start his own business for which he requires the subject premises. [4]. Section 13-A of the Act enables a specified landlord, at any time within one year prior to and/or within one year after the date of retirement, to seek eviction of his tenant from a residential/scheduled premises summarily as per the procedure prescribed under Section 18-A of the Act, which also requires effecting of service upon the tenant through more than one modes. [5]. The admitted facts are that the respondent-landlord filed the present eviction petition on 6.6.2007, i.e., within one year of his retirement. The Rent Controller, however, issued ordinary notice to the petitioner- tenant for 14.11.2007. The said notice was duly received by the petitioner- tenant on 8.10.2007 and she appeared before the Rent Controller through counsel on 14.11.2007 and also tendered the arrears of rent. On the request of her counsel, the case was adjourned to 10.12.2007 for filing the written statement. No reply was filed on 10.12.2007 and the next hearing was advanced to 8.1.2008. On 8.1.2008 also, no reply was filed by the petitioner and the case was got adjourned to 28.1.2008. It was on 28.1.2008 that the petitioner moved an application under Section 18-A of the Act seeking leave to defend. The Rent Controller has dismissed the said application as it was moved after 75 days of the petitioner's appearance in the court even when Section 18-A provides a period of 15 days only from the date of receipt of notice. [6]. Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that since no notice of the eviction petition has been served upon the petitioner through a Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 3 :- registered notice, her appearance on 14.11.2007 before the Rent Controller or on subsequent date is inconsequential. Reliance is placed upon two decisions of this Court in:- (i) Gursharan Singh v. Satpal, 1991(2) PLR 507; and (ii) Paramjit Kaur v. Gurcharan Singh Walia , 2008(1) PLR 539, wherein it has been held that where the summons are not issued to the tenant in the prescribed forms under Schedule II, i.e., through ordinary as well as registered covers, it shall be no service in the eyes of law. [7]. I have heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant provisions as well as the impugned order dated 15.5.2009. [8]. Section 18-A of the Act lays down summary procedure for disposal of applications under Section 13-A of the Act and it requires the summons to be issued to the tenant in the format specified in Schedule-II. In addition, the Rent Controller is required simultaneously to send a copy of the summons to the tenant by registered post, acknowledgment due, at the place where the tenant or his agent actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or personal works for gain. Yet another copy of the summons is required to be affixed at some conspicuous part of the building in respect whereof the application under Section 13-A of the Act has been made. [9]. Section 18-A(3)(b) and 18-A(4) of the Act thereafter provide as follows:- 18-A “(3)(b) When an acknowledgment purporting to be signed by the tenant or his agent is received by the Controller or the registered article containing the summons is received back with an endorsement purporting to have been made a postal employee to the effect that the tenant or Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 4 :- his agent has refused to take delivery of the registered article and an endorsement is made by a process server to the effect that a copy of the summons has been affixed as directed by the Controller on a conspicuous part of building and the Controller after such enquiry as he deems fit, is satisfied about the correctness of the endorsement, he may declare that there has been a valid service of the summons on the tenant”. “(4) The tenant on whom the service of summons has been declared to have been validly made under sub-section (3), shall have no right to contest the prayer for eviction from the residential building or scheduled building and/or non- residential building, as the case may be, unless he files an affidavit stating the grounds on which he seeks to contest the application for eviction and obtains leave from the Controller as hereinafter provided, and in default of his appearance in pursuance of the summons or his obtaining such leave, the statement made by the specified landlord or, as the case may be, the widow, widower, child, grandchild or the widowed daughter-in-law of such specified landlord or the owner, who is a non-resident Indian in the application for eviction shall be deemed to be admitted by the tenant and the applicant shall be entitled to an order for eviction of the tenant.” [10]. Schedule II prescribes the format of summons to be issued under Section 18-A(2) of the Act which, inter-alia, contains the information Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 5 :- regarding filing of an application for eviction under Section 13-A of the Act and that “leave to appear and contest the application may be obtained by an application to the Controller supported by an affidavit...”. [11]. The legislative scheme, thus, crystalizes that if a 'specified landlord' fulfills the conditions prescribed by Section 13-A of the Act, the tenant occupying a residential or schedule building can be evicted summarily. The only remedy available to a tenant is that once the summons for service are received by him through the modes prescribed under sub- sections (2) and (3)(a) of Section 18-A, i.e., as per Schedule II, he may seek leave to contest. In my considered view, the object of prescribing three different modes of effecting service upon the tenant is to ensure and presume his informed knowledge regarding institution of summary eviction proceedings against him under Section 13-A of the Act. If the summons have been received by him in the format prescribed by Schedule II, whether by ordinary post or by registered post or he has acquired knowledge from affixation of such summons on the building under occupation, the tenant has no choice but to apply for leave to contest within a period of 15 days from such knowledge. The tenant notwithstanding his actual knowledge and consequential appearance before the Rent Controller cannot be heard to say that he shall acquire knowledge of pendency of eviction petition only when he would receive notices through all the prescribed modes. Such an interpretation would be self-destructive and defeat the legislative object behind introduction of Section 13-A read with Section 18-A of the Act. Otherwise also, unless it is shown by the tenant that a serious prejudice like depriving him of his statutory right to seek leave to contest, has been caused, knowledge acquired by him regarding institution of eviction Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 6 :- proceedings against under Section 13-A of the Act through any of the modes shall be taken to be a valid notice. [12]. In the case in hand, the petitioner did receive the notice of a petition under Section 13-A on 7.10.2007, pursuant to which she put in appearance before the Rent Controller on 14.11.2007 and tendered the arrears of rent. Nowhere the tenant has said that on appearance on 14.11.2007 she did not come to know that the eviction proceedings were under Section 13-A of the Act. Not only this, the petitioner again appeared before the Rent Controller on 10.12.2007 and 8.1.2008. The fact that she applied for leave to contest on 28.1.2008 itself shows that she had full knowledge of the pendency of the proceedings under Section 13-A of the Act, which are required to be concluded as per the procedure prescribed under Section 18-A of the Act. It is well settled law that the Rent Controller is vested with no discretion to entertain an application for leave to contest after expiry of the prescribed period of 15 days. The petitioner admittedly applied for leave to defend after 75 days of her appearance. In this view of the matter, no error of jurisdiction has been committed by the Rent Controller in dismissing the petitioner's application for leave to contest. [13]. In Gursharan Singh's case (supra), no notice informing the tenant regarding institution of eviction proceedings under Section 13-A of the Act was served upon him. In Paramjit Kaur's case (supra) also, the tenant had no knowledge of institution of eviction proceedings under Section 13-A of the Act, rather the parties were appearing in the matter as if the petition was filed under Section 13 of the Act. Both the decisions relied upon by the petitioner are, thus, inapplicable in the matter in hand. Civil Revision No.3606 of 2009 -: 7 :- [14]. Dismissed. [15]. However, having regard to all the attending circumstances, it is directed that the execution of the eviction order shall remain in abeyance for a period of two months. July 03, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge